Skip to main content

Full text of "Hearing"

See other formats





San Francisco Public Library 









- 



REFERENCE BOOK 



Not to be taken from the Library 



g HEARING 

SENATE^RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

APR 1 6 2801 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2001 
1:40 P.M. 



41 8- R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2 001 
1:40 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



4 49386 SFPL: ECONO JRS 
88 SFPL 07/07/03 3 



3 1223 03273 9857 



11 



APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 
SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 
SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 
SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 

MEMBERS ABSENT 

SENATOR ED VINCENT 

STAFF PRESENT 

GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 

TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 

CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 

ALSO PRESENT 

ARTHUR S. LUJAN, Chief 

Division of Labor Standards Enforcement 

SENATOR DEDE ALPERT 

ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHARLENE ZETTEL 

SENATOR STEVE PEACE 

CHUCK CENTER 

State Council of Laborers 

ART CARTER 

Pipe Trades 

State Association of Electrical Workers 

Sheet Metal Workers 



Ill 



ROBERT BALGENORTH 

California State Building Trades 

ELIZABETH ECKS 

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO 

HAROLD A. ROSE, Member 
Industrial Welfare Commission 

PERRY KENNY, President 

California State Employees Association 

TOM GARDNER, President 
CDF Firefighters 

BRIAN HATCH 

California Professional Firefighters 

AARON READ 



IV 

INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

ARTHUR S. LUJAN, Chief 

Division of Labor Standards Enforcement 1 

Introduction and Support by: 

SENATOR DEDE ALPERT 1 

ASSEMBLY MEMBER CHARLENE ZETTEL 1 

SENATOR STEVE PEACE 2 

Introduction of Family 3 

Background and Experience 3 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Staffing Situation 5 

Lack of Compliance in Garment Industry 6 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Plans to Make More Effective Use of 

Existing Staff 6 

Handling Diverse Languages 7 

Witnesses in Support : 

CHUCK CENTER 

State Council of Laborers 8 

ART CARTER 

State Pipe Trades Council 

State Association of Electrical Workers 

Sheet Metal Workers 8 

ELIZABETH ECKS 

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO 8 



ROBERT BALGENORTH 

State Building Trades 9 

Motion to Confirm 9 

Committee Action 9 

HAROLD A. ROSE, Member 

Industrial Welfare Commission 9 

Introduction of Family 9 

Background and Experience 10 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Replacing CHUCK CENTER on Commission 10 

Druid 11 

Sheepherders' Issue 11 

Employee Proposal to Be Discussed at 

March 2 nd Meeting 13 

Witnesses in Support: 

PERRY KENNY, President 

California State Employees Association 13 

TOM GARDNER, President 

CDF Firefighters 13 

BRIAN HATCH 

California Professional Firefighters 14 

AARON READ 14 

ELIZABETH ECKS 

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO 14 

Motion to Confirm 14 

Committee Action 15 

Termination of Proceedings 15 

Certificate of Reporter 16 



Lujan. 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 
CHAIRMAN BURTON: Governor's appointees, Art 

SENATOR ALPERT: Good afternoon, Senator 



Johnson . 

We have a bipartisan as well as a both House 
committee, bicameral, bipartisan, and I believe that we're going 
to shortly be joined by Senator Peace, who was getting his 
jacket so he could join us as well. There he is, speak of 
Senator Peace. 

We all wanted to be here to introduce Art Lujan, 
and I think it speaks volumes that he does have this kind of 
support from the San Diego community. I think you may all be 
aware that he's headed up our Building and Trade Construction 
Council since the mid-'80s. 

He's been a very valuable member of the 
community, not only in his professional life, but things that 
he's done for San Diego State University, the school system, in 
the philanthropic community for the Cancer Center, the Holiday 
Bowl, the Vista Community Clinic, just numerous things. 

So, I just, for myself, would recommend him to 
you, ana tell you that I think he has already done a good job 
and will continue to do a good job, and he should be approved by 
the Rules Committee. 

ASSEMBLY MEMBER ZETTEL: Thank you. 

I would like to second Senator Alpert ' s 
nomination, and I heartily recommend Art Lujan. He is a 



tremendous community leader. He's worked hard for our 
community, not only on labor issues, but on housing, health 
care, educational issues, and I would encourage your approval of 
this appointment. 

SENATOR PEACE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think the Committee has an unusual opportunity 
to confirm an individual who is already battle-tested in the 
context of understanding the consequences of making decisions 
and attempting to arrive at agreements, and the compromise that 
is always necessary. 

As a labor leader, and as representative of his 
trade, he was an aggressive advocate for the people he was 
responsible to advocate for, but he also kept his eye on the 
ball with respect to understanding that at the end of the day, 
if there was no business there, there was no jobs. 

Art Lujan more than any other single individual 
is simultaneously responsible for a resurgence in 
labor-represented jobs in San Diego County as a consequence of 
his leadership in San Diego. And interestingly enough, he is 
simultaneously responsible for improving, or I should say 
reducing the tensions between the business community and the 
labor community in San Diego by being willing to carry the 
messages both directions. Not simply going to the business 
community and . arguing why labor wanted what it was arguing for, 
but also being willing to go to his own people and arguing why, 
at times, why they had to settle for less. 

He's taken criticism at times in those 
circumstances. And kind of the heart of this business in taking 



on a responsibility, as Art has been willing to volunteer to do, 
is the understanding that along with actually producing work 
product inherently comes the tug and pull of criticism from all 
sides . 

I think that is the attribute, and the integrity, 
and courage that Art brings to the table more than anyone else, 
or any other single thing. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

We have your letter of February 21st. It's been 
made part of the record. 

Why don't you just briefly say how you see the 
challenges before you, or why you want the job. 

MR. LUJAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing 
me to come before you. 

First of all, I'd like to thank Senator Peace, 
Senator Alpert, and Assemblywoman Zettel for taking the time to 
come down here and support my confirmation. It's greatly 
appreciated. 

I'd like to start out first, if I may, I come 
from a large family, so I have a Northern California contingent, 
and a Southern California contingent. Part of the Northern 
California is here, and I'd like to first introduce my sister, 
Carol Ornelas, from Stockton, and her son Matthew. And my 
sister Debbie Llata and her youngest son, Andrew, from 
Sacramento . 

As Senator Peace has indicated today, my whole 
career has been devoted to my community, to labor management, 
cooperation, to working with individuals and organizations on 



both sides of the aisle in order to achieve a common goal. As 
such, I have brought that type of a background to my short 
tenure here with the Labor Commissioner's Office. 

I have sought to improve and increase the 
training of the people that represent us out in the field to 
ensure that there is fairness, that we're consistent in our 
message, and that we are, first and foremost, that there is no 
arbitrary and capricious decisions that are being made by our 
folks. 

At the same time, part of our mission statement 
is not only to vigorously enforce the labor laws, but also to 
ensure that the employer community is educated about what the 
laws are of the state. And over the last couple of years, 
there's been new rules, regulations, and new wage orders that 
have been adopted. As such, we have set about to do outreach in 
the community to make sure that all industries understand 
exactly what is required of them. It's been extremely difficult 
in the construction industry, especially residential 
construction, because they're not used to operating under those 
kind of work orders. 

So, we've doubled our efforts to ensure that the 
word gets out into those respective industries. 

I've pledged to work to increase that outreach so 
that not only the employees understand what the rules and 
regulations are, but as well as the employers, and to go after 
those companies that are trying to gain unfair advantage against 
reputable employers through their business practices of trying 
to disobey the law. 



I would appreciate this Committee's support to 
continue the work that we've just started. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What's the staffing situation 
at your office? Authorized staff versus filled, or how many 
vacancies do you have? Do you know? 

MR. LUJAN: I can't give you exact numbers, but 
there's been previous testimony that the numbers had dropped 
dramatically from what they were ten years ago. 

With all the various augmentations, the numbers 
are beginning to increase. It's my understanding we're probably 
somewhere in the neighborhood of somewhere between 400 and 425 
employees at this particular point in time, with approximately 
80 out in the field in different locations throughout the 
state . 

I would remind everyone that we have 21 district 
offices that we also have to staff. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Let's say you were entitled to 
800 people, what percentage? Where are you as far as vacancies? 
What do you need? 

If you don't know that, that's fine. They'll be 
asking that in the budget subcommittee. 

MR. LUJAN: We can provide you with exact 
numbers . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's our information that 
basically there's less investigators and enforcement people now 
than there were 20 years ago. And you've got a bigger workforce 
and probably more problems. 

MR. LUJAN: The numbers that we've seen that go 



back as far as 10 years ago, the numbers had dropped 
dramatically, and we're in the process of rebuilding. 

Although we obviously could use more resources, 
the resources that we do have at this particular point in time, 
we're trying to be as effective and efficient as we possibly can 
be. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The U.S. Department of Labor 
showed that a very high percentage of the garment industry were 
out of compliance with wages and hours regulations. 

Do you have like a task force on the garment 
industry, or what are you doing on that? 

MR. LUJAN: It's not only the garment industry, 
but in all of the underground economy we have assigned specific 
individuals, not only field investigators, but our staff 
attorneys, and we're doing the coordination on a statewide 
basis, not only with garment, but with janitorial, with 
construction, and with agriculture. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: No guestions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Keeping in mind that you don't 
have enough people, how do you plan to make it better? Use the 
ones you've got more effectively, or have underground people? 

It concerns me that there's so many people that 
are not found out that are breaking laws. 

MR. LUJAN: We are presently putting all of our 
folks through training programs. We're trying to upgrade the 
computer systems to make sure that we use those tools that are 



available to us as effectively as we possibly can. 

At the same time, we are going -- we have been 
leveraging our resources. We're re-establishing our memorandums 
of understanding with not only the state but federal agencies. 
We're working with the Department of Labor, Cal-OSHA, State 
Contractors License Board, EDD, as well as the local city 
attorneys and district attorneys in order to have a broader base 
of operation, so we can have as much impact in a local community 
as we possibly can. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I notice that there's so many 
people that don't speak English. How do you handle that? I 
know you can't have people speaking all the languages that are 
in L.A., for example. 

MR. LUJAN: That's been one of my top 
priorities. If you can see in my communication, the long-term 
goal is to make sure that we have adequate staffing from a 
bilingual perspective. 

We target those populations. And every time that 
we go on sweeps of any sort, we always make sure that we have 
people that can speak the language that's being spoken by a 
majority of the people involved in that particular industry. 

And we will continue to make sure that we have 
those bilingual capabilities. At the same time, we want to make 
sure that educational material that we put out is put out in 
more than just the English language. 

To that extent, even people working within the 
Division, for instance, and I use this as an example, there is a 
dialect of people spoken from a certain portion of Mexico called 



8 



Mezteca. When we know that we're going into those areas that 
may have this population, we make sure that we have the 
translation capabilities. 

So, we're working with what we have, always being 
sensitive to the fact that we have to have people out in the 
field that are speaking the language of those employees. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do you have any viewpoints on 
what your office's current position is on the banks mandating 
tellers to clean the ATM machines during their off-time. 

[Laughter] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Okay. Just a thought. 

Witnesses in support, please. 

MR. CENTER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chuck 
Center . 

State Council of Laborers proudly support Art 
Lujan, who is a member of Laborers Local 89 out of San Diego. 

Thank you. 

MR. CARTER: Art Carter on behalf of the State 
Pipe Trades Council, the State Association of Electrical 
Workers, and the Sheet Metal Workers, in strong support. 

We urge the Legislature to add positions so he 
can enforce the law. 

MS. ECKS: Elizabeth Ecks, California Labor 
Federation in support of the confirmation today. 

Clearly we've heard the role of the Labor 



Commissioner, and having someone from labor, and knowing labor's 
issues, will certainly help in endeavoring of enforcing our 
state laws. We support the confirmation. 

MR. BALGENORTH: Bob Balgenorth, State Building 
Trades. We're in strong support of Art Lujan for Labor 
Commissioner . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in opposition? 
Hearing none, pleasure of the Committee? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Moved by Senator Karnette. 
Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Four to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you, Art. 

Harold Rose, Member of the IWC. 

MR. ROSE: Thank you. 

First, I'd like to introduce my family. With me 
is my wife, Bruna, April, 40 years. Our daughter and son, 
daughter-in-law and son, Dave and Valerie. In the audience 
there's some folks who speak for my support, I certainly hope. 

And I have Perry Kenny, President of CSEA. He's 



10 



sitting beside me. 

Senator Burton, Senators of the Senate Rules 
Committee, I'm gratified to be able to be here this afternoon. 
With my appointment by Gray Davis, Governor Gray Davis, to the 
Industrial Welfare Commission and the opportunity to appear 
before you is a highlight of my life. 

I've been representing state employees for the 
last 40 years, working with CSEA at Humboldt State, Sonoma 
State, and Sonoma State Hospital. 

In the last four years of my employment, I worked 
with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 
which I worked 35 years, the last four years as the union rank 
and file rep. on a statewide basis, representing 5,000 
employees . 

With a progressive and understanding Industrial 
Welfare Commission, the State of California will be leader in 
wages and the rights of employees. 

I filed my first grievance at age 17 for minimum 
wage. Shortly thereafter I was unemployed. There was nobody 
there to help me, so I decided I've got to help myself. I've 
been doing so, and it continues today. 

I'm asking to be confirmed today so that I can 
continue to represent California workers to a higher position 
than ever before. 

Sitting beside me is Perry Kenny. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Whose place are you taking? 

MR. ROSE: I don't know. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Are you taking Chuck's place? 



11 



Stonehenge? 



Francisco? 



there 



MR. ROSE: Okay. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I see that you're a Druid. 

MR. ROSE: Yes, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Have you ever been to 

MR. ROSE: No, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Want to go? 

MR. ROSE: Yeah. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So would I, actually. 

Have you ever been to Druid's Hall in San 

MR. ROSE: No, Santa Rosa only. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They had a great, great hall 



Tell me about the sheepherders issue. 

MR. ROSE: Do you have time, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes. 

MR. ROSE: Sheepherders are brought into 
California, to the United States, but California is what we're 
concerned with. There's 280 of them on a federal government 
program, an H2A program. 

They come in from Peru, China, Mexico, Mongolia. 
And they get paid 960 dollars a month for 24 hours a day, seven 
days a week, 365 days a year. They're given a trailer, and they 
have potable water, and a refrigerator, and that's all they get. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They don't have a right to 
receive mail? 

MR. ROSE: That's part of it. They have a 



12 



problem receiving mail. The rancher will bring the mail and the 
food to the sheepherder, wherever the sheepherder is. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So they can get mail, but it's 
mail like through a post office box? 

MR. ROSE: Or the ranch itself, and then just 
deliver it once a week. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Can't mail it out to Big Rock 
there in the middle of the meadow. 

MR. ROSE: No. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Family visits? Do they have 
the right to family visits? 

MR. ROSE: I assume they do. That's a question 
that never came up. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: If the trailer's big enough. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In other words, there's no 
longer any not necessarily native California Basques, but -- 

MR. ROSE: There's eight of them working in 
California . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: There's only eight Basques 
left? 

MR. ROSE: That are United States citizens, yes, 
sir . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In fact, in the district I 
represent, they have a lot of the Basque hotels where they'd 
come in whenever they got time off and kind of paint the town 
red, and then go back up in the hills. 

There's only eight Basques left doing that 
sheepherding . 



13 



What do you know about a proposal -- this is 
what's wrong when other people write up questions for you to 
ask. I don't even know my position on this. 

But there's an employee proposal to be reviewed 
at the March 2nd meeting, Friday? Do you even know what I'm 
talking about? 

MR. ROSE: Yes, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Good. What am I talking about? 

MR. ROSE: There's two proposals. One is home 
care providers want an exclusion for overtime; they want a 
different work week. And we're going to discuss the Wage Board 
decision that met two weeks ago on sheepherders . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I don't have any questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: No. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support. 

MR. KENNY: Perry Kenny, the California State 
Employees Association. 

We stand, and we sit at the moment, in support 
for the reasons -- I turned a document in to you, and all the 
service that he's supplied to our active and retired employees 
at CSU. So, we support Harold Rose, and we hope you will, too. 

MR. GARDNER: Tom Gardner, President, CDF 
Firefighters, in strong support of Harold. 

Harold came back. When the Governor appointed 



14 



one of our labor reps to state service, Harold came back and 
helped us once again as a labor rep, and he's been one all his 
life. 

MR. HATCH: Brian Hatch, on behalf of the 
California Professional Firefighters. We're here also in 
support of Harold. 

He's been an asset to our organization, working 
with the organization to help better the working conditions of 
our firefighters. And we're glad to see him here. 

MR. READ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members. 
Aaron Read, pleased to be here. 

I have known Harold for 32 years: my 10 years at 
CSEA, and 22 years representing CDF Firefighters. He's always 
been there for the men and women who work hard for a living. 
Great friend, and I'm pleased to be here on his behalf. 

MS. ECKS: Labor Federation, AFL-CIO. We're in 
support . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in opposition? 
Pleasure of the Committee? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 



15 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Four to zero 
CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 
MR. ROSE: Thank you very much, Senators. 
[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
terminated at approximately 2:08 P.M.] 
--00O00-- 



16 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 



I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

+ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 



day of /-\ldlC / '^ 2001 



— c 



/ -t 



JU^r^ 



7~ . ' ) 

EVELYN J. MIZAK '^ 
Shorthand Reporter 



418-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 418-R when ordering. 



^HEARING 

£ SENATE^RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
APR 1 6 2091 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 112 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY MARCH 7, 2001 
1:30 P.M. 



Reported by: 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 



ROOM 112 



SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2 001 



1:30 P.M. 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 

SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 

SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 

SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 

SENATOR ED VINCENT 

STAFF PRESENT 

GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 

TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 

CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 

ALSO PRESENT 

STEPHEN V. GIORGI, Chief 

Bureau of Security and Investigative Services 

ALVA S. COOPER 
Sacramento County Sheriff 

CARL BRAKENSIEK 

California Association of Licensed Repossessors 

G. ALBERT HOWENSTEIN, JR. 

California Association of Licensed Security Agencies, 

Guards and Associates 

FRANCIE KOEHLER, President 

California Association of Licensed Investigators 

DONALD R. MEYER 

Commissioner of Financial Institutions 



Ill 



BOB ARNOULD 

California Credit Union League 

RUSSELL W. NOACK, Administrator/Leg. Advocate 
California Association of Industrial Banks 

ARTHUR H. ROSENFELD, Ph.D., Member 

State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission 

SENATOR DEBRA BOWEN 

V. JOHN WHITE 

Sierra Club, Clean Power Campaign, and 

Natural Resources Defense Council 

PAUL GLADFELTY 
Lennox International 

JON D. EDWARDS 

Professional Engineers in California Government 

ROBERT PERNELL 

CEC and California State Council of Labor 



IV 

INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

STEPHEN V. GIORGI, Chief 

Bureau of Security and Investigative Services 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Licensing of Locksmiths 2 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Advertisements for Tools that Pick Locks 4 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Licensing of Security Guards 5 

Ability of Security Guards to Carry 

Firearms 6 

Licensing of Private Investigators 6 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Number of Hours Required to Be Licensed 

Private Investigator 7 

Witnesses in Support: 

ALVIN COOPER 

Sacramento County Sheriff Vargas 9 

CARL BRAKENSIEK 

California Association of Licensed Repossessors 9 

AL HOWENSTEIN 

California Association of Licensed Security 

Guards and Associates 9 



FRANCIE KOEHLER, President 

California Association of Licensed Investigators 9 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Licensing of Special Police 10 

Motion to Confirm 12 

Committee Action 12 

DONALD R. MEYER 

Commissioner of Financial Institutions 12 

Background and Mission 13 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Number of State -Chartered Banks and 

Savings & Loans 14 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Financial Literacy 14 

Number of Employees and Vacancies 15 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Difference between Debit Card and 

Credit Card 16 

Questions by SENATOR VINCENT re: 

Use of Cards at Gas Stations 17 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Separation of Credit Unions 18 

Transferring Money to Other Countries 18 

Witnesses in Support: 

BOB ARNOULD 

California Credit Union League 2 



VI 



RUSSELL NOACK 

California Association of Industrial Banks 20 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Boalt Hall on Hay Street 20 

Miraloma Park 21 

Motion to Confirm 21 

Committee Action 22 

ARTHUR H. ROSENFELD, Ph.D., Member 

State Energy Resources Conservation and 

Development Commission 22 

Introduction and Support by: 

SENATOR DEBRA BOWEN 22 

View on Role of Energy Commission 23 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Cost to Put Real-time Meters on 

Existing Buildings 25 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Difference in Projections from CEC and 

ISO 2 7 

Kinds of Shortfalls that Might Be 

Faced this Summer 2 7 

Rolling Resistance of Tires 28 

Proposed Study by Orange County Sanitation 

District Relating to Plant in Huntington 

Beach and Bacteria Count on Beaches 3 

Statements by SENATOR VINCENT re: 

Impressed with Nominee' s Background 32 

Alonzo Stagg and Soldiers Field 33 



VI 1 



Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

How Will SB 5X Help This Summer 34 

CEC's Tracking of Natural Gas Supplies 35 

Early Warnings from CEC that No One 

Heeded 35 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Conservation Contracts 35 

Saving Money Should be Enough Incentive 36 

Witnesses in Support: 

JOHN WHITE 

Sierra Club 

Clean Power Campaign 

Natural Resources Defense Council 37 

PAUL GLADFELTY 

Lennox International 38 

JON EDWARDS 

Professional Engineers in California Government 38 

ROBERT PERNELL 

California Energy Commission 

California State Council of Laborers 38 

Motion to Confirm 3 8 

Committee Action 3 9 

Termination of Proceedings 39 

Certificate of Reporter •'. 4 






P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Governor's appointees required 
to appear, Stephen Giorgi, Chief, Bureau of Security and 
Investigative Services. 

MR. GIORGI: Senator Burton, thank you. It is an 
honor for me to be here before you today. 

Senator Knight, Senator Karnette, Senator 
Vincent, Senator Johnson, thank you very much for your time this 
afternoon. I'm very honored to be here. 

I would, if I may, like to introduce a couple of 
people very quickly. My wife of 32 years, Marilyn, is here, and 
also my son, Nathan. I'd like to introduce them to the 
Committee . 

I've spent over 28 years of my life in federal 
law enforcement. At the time of my retirement in 1997, I was 
appointed as Chief of the Enforcement Division for the 
Department of Consumer Affairs. In May of last year, I was 
honored to be appointed by Governor Davis to the position of 
Chief of the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services. 

The Bureau, as you probably well know, regulates 
various security industries in the State of California, and that 
includes locksmiths, private investigators, private patrol 
operators, security guards, repossessors, security training 
facilities, alarm companies and their employees. 

The Bureau is challenged to ensure that those 
regulated industries provide safe and professional security 
services to the California consumer. The Bureau is committed 



to providing efficient and effective licensing and enforcement 
services for the consumers of this state. 

We are committed to meeting and improving our 
licensing goals. Our enforcement activity has been enhanced 
and has been emphasized, and fradulent business activity and 
unlicensed activity is our highest enforcement priority. 

Probably the most significant challenge facing 
the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services is to ensure 
that full law enforcement checks are conducted prior to security 
guards beginning assignment. I am confident that working with 
the Legislature and the industry, we will meet that challenge. 

In the short time that I've been with the Bureau, 
I am very impressed with the staff. We have 44 very dedicated 
and professional employees. I look forward to working with 
them and continuing our services to the people of this state. 

My personal goals are to serve the 
administration, the consumers, and industry with fairness and 
professional leadership. 

I'll be glad to take any questions that you might 
have, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What do you do with locksmiths? 

MR. GIORGI: We license locksmiths. We also 
regulate the locksmith industry with respect to complaints and 
enforcement activities. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So somebody wants to be a 
locksmith. They get a state license? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct. They would come to 
us and make application. We would take those fees. They would 



go through a law enforcement check as far as background; 
background as it relates only to law enforcement. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Would that include, like, 
hardware stores? 

MR. GIORGI: Not just the making of keys, 
Senator, no, it would not include those individuals. The actual 
locksmiths that go to residences. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The ones that change the locks? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct, at your residence. 
Those are the ones that are licensed by us. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So, it would be locksmiths as 
opposed to key makers. 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why do you want to license a 
locksmith? 

MR. GIORGI: Why do we license locksmiths? They 
have dual licensing. They have a licensing with us; they also 
have a licensing with the California State Contractors' 
Licensing Board. 

The reason, of course, is that a locksmith has 
the ability, the knowledge, the technology, to open residences. 
It's important that we ensure the people of this state that 
those people who are doing it, as far as — their background has 
been checked, and that they're doing it for the proper purposes. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Vincent, welcome back. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Thank you very much. 



4 



No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Yes, one question. 

I get a lot of magazines every now and then. In 
one of the magazines there is an item in there that indicates 
that you can open any lock at all with this pick. It's for 
sale . 

Yet, you license locksmiths, but this thing is on 
the market with various interchangeable heads for different 
types of locks, et cetera. 

Is that legal? 

MR. GIORGI: Yes, it is. Those type of lock 
picking sets, per se, are available to anyone who wishes to buy 
them. Of course, there is certain training that is needed in 
order to use that type of tool. But it is legal for the sale of 
that type of equipment. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's legal to sell lock picks? 

MR. GIORGI: Yes, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: To anybody? 

MR. GIORGI: I believe anyone can purchase those 
sets . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: That's fascinating. I was 
under the impression that people got arrested for having 
burglary tools in their possession, and that included picks for 
picking locks. That's not the case? 

MR. GIORGI: Senator, to my knowledge, there's no 
law that prohibits the sale of a lock picking tool. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Because they might need to be 



used for legitimate purposes. 

Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I have a question about 
security guards. 

I know you license security guards. 

MR. GIORGI: That is correct. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: But aren't there some problems 
with getting back information? You have to have them finger 
printed, and everything, and they go to work sometimes before 
you get the information. Is there anything you can do about 
that? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct, Senator, as we 
discussed yesterday. 

The current law allows for a security guard to be 
allowed to work under a temporary guard card situation if they 
meet the requirement of not having a conviction. Meaning that 
if they go to a private patrol operator, and the private patrol 
operator wishes to put them to work, they ask the question, 
"Have you ever been convicted?" If the individual says that 
they have not, the private patrol operator can put that 
individual to work on a temporary basis until we do the law 
enforcement check on the person's application and finger print 
process. That is in current law. 

That is a concern of mine. It's a concern of the 
Department; it's a concern of the Bureau. And I might add, it's 
also a concern of industry as well, because industry, like the 
state, would like to ensure that the most professional, and the 
safest, and the right people are out there doing that type of 



employment . 

We're looking at working with the Department of 
Justice to try and speed up that process, where we can do a full 
law enforcement check prior to these individuals being assigned 
work as a security officer. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: And they can carry a firearm? 

MR. GIORGI: No, Senator, they cannot. That's 
another application as well. That application for firearms, 
you cannot carry firearms until a full law enforcement check is 
done by the FBI and the Department of Justice; that must occur 
first . 

SENATOR KARNETTE: There's one other question I 
would like to have a response on. 

Private investigators are licensed, the firm, but 
not the individual private investigators? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct. You could have a 
private investigative firm where the qualified manager is a 
private investigator. That person would be licensed by us; that 
person would be tested by us; that person would have to have the 
6,000 hours requirements in order to be a private investigator. 

But that firm could employ individuals working 
under the private investigator to do private investigative type 
work, such as surveillances, interviews, and things of that 
nature, working under the umbrella of the private investigator 
and working under the direction of that person. They must be an 
employee, however. They cannot be an independent contractor. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: So, if they were employed by a 
company to look at some employees, they could go in and get 



information even though they weren't licensed Pis? 

MR. GIORGI: That is correct. We are looking at 
that. We have had discussions with industry with respect to 
possibly registering those types of individuals, and that would 
allow us to do law enforcement checks on those individuals prior 
to them doing that type of work. 

The industry is very interested in pursuing that. 
Again, heightens and raises the bar with respect to 
professionalism if you register all employees, and we have a 
background, law enforcement background check done prior to them 
doing that type of work. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What are these 6,000 hours 
somebody has to go through to be licensed? 

MR. GIORGI: Correct. You have to have some type 
of training in order to be a private investigator. You could 
have an education from a criminal justice program or — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: If you're like a retired cop, 
automatically? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They would have had those 

hours? 

MR. GIORGI: That's correct. You would have to 
have 6,000 hours, and then it would have to be certified by your 
police chief or sheriff that you have that type of law 
enforcement background. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Six thousand hours, forty hours 
a week, that's three years about? 



MR. GIORGI: That's correct, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: We'll shovel this off to 
Senator Figueroa of somebody, but it would seem to me just 
because you've got an ex-cop running the firm, they can hire 
anybody they want to do whatever it is private investigators do. 
That would seem to me to defeat the purpose. 

MR. GIORGI: And that is a concern of ours, and I 
know it is a concern of industry, and we are looking at that 
with respect to potential or possible legislation with 
registering those individuals. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You're registering some 
locksmith. You've got these people that are doing God knows 
what . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Peeking through key holes. 
[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It just seems to me kind of 
bizarre that the only thing they're doing different than the 
licensed holder is, they're the ones receiving a paycheck 
instead of signing it. 

MR. GIORGI: And they're working under the 
supervision, hopefully, of the private investigator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In other words, they don't have 
the one boss licensed going out with the person and sitting on 
surveillance or whatever, where they could only do one at a 
time . 

It seems to me something that probably ought to 
be looked at. You could have one cop who did three or four 
years, 20 people working under him that, for all you know, could 



be anything and everything. 

MR. GIORGI: It is on our plate, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support, briefly. 

MR. COOPER: Mr. Chairman and Members, Al Cooper 
representing Sheriff Vargas in support of this appointment. 

MR. BRAKENSIEK: Mr. Chairman and Members, Carl 
Brakensiek on behalf of the California Association of Licensed 
Repossessors, strongly in support of this confirmation. 

MR. HOWENSTEIN: Mr. Chairman and Members of the 
Committee, Al Howenstein representing the California Association 
of Licensed Security Guards and Associates. 

We are in full support of Mr. Giorgi. I will 
recognize that the questions that Senator Karnette has asked are 
questions that we're really working closely with Mr. Giorgi on. 
And he's one of the first Bureau Chiefs who has put forth a 
■tremendous amount of effort to deal with that specific issue, 
and we're very thankful for that kind of leadership. We think 
that's what he brings to the office. 

We urge your support. Thank you. 

MS. KOEHLER: Francie Koehler, President of the 
California Association of Licensed Investigators. 

I appreciated the questions you brought up today; 
thank you very much. 

I am in total support on behalf of my Association 
for Mr. Giorgi ' s confirmation. I have found, in working with 
him the last ten months, for him to be concerned equally about 
consumer protection as well as the enforcement of licensing 
misconduct and license activities. And I have had found him to 



10 



be responsive as we've been trying to develop standards for our 
profession. 

Thank you very much. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You appreciate that question. 
What do you think about it? 

MS. KOEHLER: It's something that's been an 
ongoing discussion in our Association as well as with Mr. Giorgi 
and his predecessor. 

I personally would not be opposed to such a 
bill. I can't say I can speak for my Association, but I would 
support it myself. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'll talk to Senator Figueroa, 
because I have a little bit on my plate right now. But it just 
doesn't make any sense to me. 

Thank you. 

MS. KOEHLER: I understand. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do you license the special cops 
or the door shakers, as we used to call them, if they have them 
anymore? 

You know, the private cops. I guess they would 
be security people or what? 

MR. GIORGI: It depends on the — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In San Francisco we used to 
have, like, special police which basically businesses in an area 
hired, and they were basically door shakers. Then you had, I 
guess, some other kind that basically were private patrol police 
that sometimes signed up a bunch of people in the neighborhood. 
I guess they would be licensed? 



11 



MR. GIORGI: It's not a yes or no answer, 
Senator. It depends on the definition of their duties, and it 
also depends on whether or not they are a proprietary security 
officer, meaning that if they're employed by an apartment 
complex, for example, directly by the apartment complex, they 
are not required to be licensed by the State of California as 
long as they're not carrying a baton or a firearm. 

There is a bill pending in this legislation that 
would recommend changing that to all security officers would be 
licensed by the State of California. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Well, if they're not carrying a 
baton or a gun, they're a doorman. 

MR. GIORGI: Not necessarily. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: A maintenance engineer. 

MR. GIORGI: They could still be performing 
•security services. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yeah, they walk around and 
look, but really, it's not what you'd call your security. 

But what I was talking about, which I assume they 
would have to be licensed at least by the local police 
department, but special cops that literally would patrol a 
neighborhood, where the people in that neighborhood association 
would hire them to patrol. It's my understanding they even 
carry weapons, so they'd probably have to be licensed. 

MR. GIORGI: I'm just not sure. To me, it would 
depend on the actual definition of their type of duties as to 
whether they would meet the definition of a security officer. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: If they carry a gun, I guess 



12 



they would. 

MR. GIORGI : If they carry a firearm, they would 
have to be licensed. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in opposition? 

Hearing none, moved by Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Yes, move. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. . 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Vincent Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Five to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 

Donald Meyer, Commissioner of Financial 
Institutions . 

That used to have a different name? 

MR. MEYER: Yes, it used to be called the 
Department of Banking. 

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: We do have your statement, 
background for the record. Maybe you just want to highlight or 
tell us how you see your position. 



13 



Institutions . 



staff 



MR. MEYER: I'll be very brief, Senator. 
I'm Donald Meyer, Commissioner of Financial 

My wife of 34 years is here today with me and my 



The mission of the Department is primarily to 
provide Californians with safe and sound financial institutions 
which serve the convenience and needs of the public. 

You have many points in my presentation to the 
Committee, just the highlights. I'm trying to make sure there's 
a viable state charter. Trying to make sure we give quality 
service to our licensees. Trying to make sure that we monitor 
the internet as it affects financial services to both our 
licensees and the public. 

We are developing more public information on our 
web site and through foreign language brochures. 

Finally, I hope to do something about financial 
literacy to the extent I can. 

My short-term goal is to keep a highly trained 
and motivated workforce at BFI . When I arrived, there were 40 
vacancies out of about 215 positions. We've filled almost all 
of those. 

I'd like to improve the management information 
system and the use of electronics because that's becoming more 
and more in our industry. We need to examine banks remotely if 
we can. 

And I finally want to deliver better services to 
consumers by highlighting what some of the institutions have 



14 



done so others will copy. 

I'll gladly give you any information you'd like, 
but I'll stop right there. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How many state-chartered banks 



are there? 



the year. 



S&Ls? 



MR. MEYER: Two hundred and two as of the end of 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: And how many state-chartered 



MR. MEYER: Three. There used to be 300; most 
of them have converted or disappeared. 

Credit unions, there are 216. There are foreign 
banks in the state, 54. There are 18 trust companies, and 22 
industrial banks, which have become last year, due to some 
legislation passed, very similar to commercial banks. 

Finally, we have premium finance companies; there 
are 73 of those. 

About $200 billion in assets in those 
institutions . 

We also have transmitters in money abroad, 52. 
There's about 12,000 agents transmitting abroad. We do not 
regulate domestic transmission in California. 

Finally, we have money order issuers, 10, and 
traveler's check issuers, 6. And then we have some 
representatives of foreign banks that are not full-service, 66 
of those, 721 licensees. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Did you say financial literacy? 



15 



MR. MEYER: Yes. What I was speaking here is 
both for K through 12, and for adults, you need to understand 
what financial services are available to you. More could be 
done in this area, I believe. 

Very few people understand truly the difference 
between a credit card and a debit card. I'd like to put 
information out about that. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why don't you explain that. 
[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I assure you that Mrs. Johnson 
knows the difference. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. MEYER: You do check your checking account 
balance; right. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What is the difference? 

SENATOR JOHNSON: How do you go from being a 
political science major at UC Berkeley in the '60s to being a 
banker. 

[Laughter. ] 
MR. MEYER: I had a lot of educational debts, 
Senator. I was in the Peace Corps right after that and didn't 
make much money, and I had to pay off my school loans from law 
school. So, I went for the first paying job at a law firm, then 
the bank hired me out of the law firm. 

I was primarily a bank lawyer. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: One serious question, if I may. 

How many employees do you have? 

MR. MEYER: We have about 212 staff. 



16 



SENATOR JOHNSON: Are there vacancies currently? 

MR. MEYER: Yes, there are. Basically the number 
I just gave you. We have 218 authorized and 16 vacancies. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Thank you very much. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Better off than most. 

MR. MEYER: We've had a big hiring campaign. We 
went from periodic exams to a continuous examination. 

Believe me, it's hard to find people for 40,000 a 
year with 16 units of accounting who want to work in the Bay 
Area for the State of California, but we found them. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: All right, let's get back to 
the nitty-gritty. What is the difference between a debit card 
and a credit card? 

[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You're not getting out of here 
this easy. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. MEYER: Don't use the debit card. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What is it? 

MR. MEYER: Well, a debit card charges your 
account immediately. A credit card, you have a period of time 
to pay. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: For example? 

MR. MEYER: If you have a debit card, and you go 
down to the local 7-11, you run it through the terminal. 
Electronically, that goes right into your bank through a system, 
charges your account. The next morning, your balance will be 
less that amount. 



17 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's like an ATM card. 

MR. MEYER: It's the same thing, right. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's double-speak. 

MR. MEYER: It doubles; that's right. Many of 
them double as such. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: No, I said double-speak. ATM 
cards we understand. 

MR. MEYER: But more importantly, the protections 
that you have with --. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What are you doing about 
getting another ATM machine back in this building. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. MEYER: There is one downstairs. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: No, there was. That's before 
the truck went through. 

Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: I was interested in what you 
were saying. I used to go into gas stations, ARCO. I used to 
go in there and use your debit card. You go into Texico, it 
says credit or debit. I just pay cash. I didn't know what it 
meant . 

MR. MEYER: Well ARCO, the price is a little 
lower at ARCO. Did you notice that? And that's because they're 
not giving two or three percent to the credit card company; all 
right? They give one percent on the debit card. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So, the debit card takes the 
place of a check? 

MR. MEYER: Exactly. That's a good way of saying 



18 



it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I don't have any questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I have one about credit 
unions . 

I know that the Legislature created the 
Department of Financial Institutions in '96, and it kept the 
day-to-day regulation of commercial banks and credit unions 
separate . 

Is that being done now? Are you committed to 
doing that? 

MS. MEYER: Yes. The Governor has appointed 
directly a Deputy for credit unions, who is in the Department of 
Financial Institutions. There's a Division of Credit Unions. 
They are separate, and they are run separately. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: There was another question I 
had, if I might. 

There's been talk about transferring money from 
the U.S. to other countries, especially Mexico and Central 
America. I've heard bills on this. 

Is it difficult for consumers to really compare 
and shop when they're transmitting money? There's all that talk 
about the money exchange, and how, in a week, it can change a 
little bit, and then if you buy — 

MR. MEYER: Consumers can find information about 
the fees. There is a web site maintained by the government of 
Mexico in Spanish, the Consumer Affairs Department of the 



19 



government of Mexico. It shows the rates in every major U.S. 
city. They're gathered by the Mexican Consulate to transmit 
pesos to Mexico, for example, both the fee and the conversion 
rate. You can look at that on the web. 

Now, obviously, many people don't have access to 
the web. You have to shop, then, like anything. If you go to 
Safeway, or you go to Lucky, it's the same thing. Go to 
different transmitters, and you will find the pricing is right 
there on the receipt, which we regulate. You can determine what 
the cost will be. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: But people still have 
discussions about whether or not the people that are receiving 
the money are being treated fairly. 

MR. MEYER: There have been some problems with 
fees being charged on the other end of the transaction, which we 
do not regulate. 

President Fox announced at a press conference 
last week that he was going to lower the fees charged by the 
Mexican telephone system, which is all over the country and used 
by many people. 

The market has brought down fees because of 
competition in the last two years. There's continuing 
litigation, though, over how much the foreign exchange is paid 
for, if it's a retail rate or a wholesale rate. We do not 
regulate that presently. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions. 



20 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support, briefly. 

MR. ARNOULD: Bob Arnould from the California 
Credit Union League in support of the nomination, Mr. Chairman. 

MR. NOACK: Hello. Russell Noack, on behalf of 
the California Association of Industrial Banks, in support of 
the nomination. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What's an industrial bank? 

MR. NOACK: An industrial bank is, remember the 
old thrift and loan companies? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Very well. The ten percenters? 

MR. NOACK: No longer. They are -- as you know, 
and as Senator Polanco and under Commissioner Meyer's leadership 
last year, the industrial banking law was modernized, 
simplified, brought under the rubric of the banking community 
and has all of the rules that apply to all banks and savings 
institutions now applicable to our industry. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why do you call them industrial 
banks? 

MR. NOACK: It was — it came — it was called 
the industrial -- it came after the First World War for 
industrial workers because it was the only place for working 
class folks to get loans. It was the only place at that time, 
and that's where it came from. 

Thanks, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They're wondering whether you 
went to Boalt on Hay Street. 

MR. MEYER: On Hay Street, the old Boalt, yes. 
The old brick pile. I was in the centennial — I was there in 



21 



'56, the centennial year. And the earthquake shook it up pretty 
bad that year. 

MR. MEYER: I went to Aptos High School. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You went to Aptos Junior High? 

MR. MEYER: Yes, right. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I was the playground director 
at Aptos in '56. 

MR. MEYER: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You don't have to thank me. I 
was getting paid for it, $1.56 hourly. That was about $530 a 
month, thank you. 

Witnesses in opposition? Hearing none, Senator 
Karnette moves. 

What was your address in San Francisco when you 
went to Aptos? 

MR. MEYER: In Miraloma Park on Myra Way. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Myra Way? 

MR. MEYER: Absolutely. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'll be darned. I was also 
playground director at Miraloma Park. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. MEYER: Thank you again. I grew up there. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Now he's the playground 
director for the State Senate. 

[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: And I tended bar At the 
Miraloma Club. So, I've got strong roots to Miraloma. 

MR. MEYER: That's where the Boy Scouts used to 



22 



meet . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Exactly. 

Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Vincent Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Five to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 

State Energy Resources Conservation and 
Development Commission, Dr. Arthur Rosenfeld. 

Any relation to Harvey? 

DR. ROSENFELD: No, it's spelled differently. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Bowen. 

SENATOR BOWEN: Members, I would like to 
introduce to you Dr. Art Rosenfeld, one of my true heroes. If 
you want to know how many energy efficient refrigerators it 
would take to displace an entire new power plant, this is the 
guy you want to ask. 

Dr. Rosenfeld is a Berkeley graduate, has a Ph.D. 
in physics, and started out to have a career in particle physics 
until the oil crunch hit in the early '70s, and his career took 



23 



a strange and, for the State of California, very fortunate turn. 
He began investigating energy efficiency, and particularly the 
claims of some fairly whacky folks that you could actually 
reduce the amount of energy you needed just by changing the way 
you built buildings and lit lighting. That actually turned out 
to be true. 

I am delighted to have Dr. Rosenfeld's expertise 
available to this state as we deal with the kinds of things that 
he's spent many years studying. 

DR. ROSENFELD: Thank you, Senator Bowen. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you, Doctor. 

Why don't you just briefly give us how you see 
the role of the Energy Commission in what's going on today. 

DR. ROSENFELD: Thank you. I'll give you my view 
of my role on the Energy Commission. We have Commissioners with 
a variety of credentials, and I'm the only scientist-engineer. 
So, that's where I've been putting my efforts. 

In particular, most of my credentials, as Senator 
Bowen said, have been on what's called the demand side of the 
meter, learning how to build buildings more efficiently, 
appliances more efficiently. 

And as you may know, California has a wonderful 
record of energy efficiency since 1974, when we sort of woke up 
to all this. Per capita in buildings, our energy use is down by 
45 percent, so that if we hadn't done all that, we would have 
like another 50 percent of power supply needed to run our 
buildings . 

Right now, however, what I am pushing is, 



24 



obviously, that we're focusing on the electricity shortage, and 
the specific thing that I'm working on very hard goes like 
this. When we started playing with restructuring, we allowed 
wholesale prices to go up and down as demands requires, so that 
electricity on the wholesale market may be 20 times as expensive 
at 3:00 o'clock on a hot afternoon as it was 12 hours before 
that. But we froze retail prices in the old-fashioned method of 
the 20th Century, where you read the meter only once a month, 
and you were completely unaware of the time fluctuations of 
electricity. 

So, what we would like to have is that buildings 
and industry would respond to high prices. What we actually 
have is an archaic situation in which, although the prices are 
known, and they're on the web, you don't get any reward for 
saving at real-time prices. So, we have this strange situation 
in which people can keep track of NASDAQ, or Standard & Poor, or 
Dow-Jones on the web and respond immediately, but they could 
also keep track of real-time prices and nobody responds at all. 

What we have to do is to make real-time prices 
available to buildings. Let me, to put this in context, make 
the following point. 

Buildings use two-thirds of all electricity in 
California. So, basically the way buildings goes is the way the 
state goes. Half of all that on a hot afternoon goes to air 
conditioning. So, the important thing is to have air 
conditioning: a, be efficient, more efficient than it is now; 
and secondly, respond to prices. 

When I got here, the first thing I did was to 



25 



talk to my friends in the utilities, and we ran some very 
encouraging experiments in which we pretended that the buildings 
did see price. And when the price of electricity went up in the 
middle of the afternoon, the thermostat automatically turned up 
four degrees, the building slowly heated up four degrees. 
Almost nobody noticed. After four hours, we had ended up saving 
30 percent of the air conditioning load, on the average, and 
that worked in experiments in Sacramento and in Los Angeles. 

So, now the problem is to get that implemented so 
that we have real-time pricing, real-time meters in buildings so 
that the people will be rewarded for doing that in real time. 
With that, we should be able to, this summer and next summer, 
save something like 2,000 megawatts of badly needed peak power. 

So, that's the sort of thing where I think I can 
contribute. Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I've talked to some of the 
business communities and others about this. 

What would it cost? With new buildings, you 
could probably do real-time metering, as it were, fairly 
simply. 

What would it cost, do you have any figure on 
like if we retrofitted? 

DR. ROSENFELD: Sure do. 

First of all, although eventually, and in 10 
years I'm sure that all the state, including residential 
properties, will have real-time meters, for the moment there are 
two classes. Of the state's 50,000 megawatts, a number which 
you all know, 8,000 megawatts are in buildings that already have 



26 



real-time meters. There are really big buildings and customers. 

In the past, instead of responding to price, 
we've used what are called interruptable contracts, in which 
they got a 15 percent break on their electricity bill, in return 
for which they had to save energy when called upon during a 
crisis. That's become very unpopular because they got called on 
for many, many hours in the last year, and that program is in a 
shambles and is being basically discontinued. 

So, those customers, it costs very little to give 
them real-time prices and let them respond as they wish in 
real-time . 

The group you're really asking about is the 
following. One-half of one percent of buildings, 40,000 meters, 
are now, I would say, low hanging fruit. They are medium size 
buildings. They've never seen real-time prices. They've never 
experimented with thermostat control and dimming lights. 

Forty thousand meters will probably cost around 
$50 million. And the savings from that are probably a matter of 
a month or less. The reason I say that is, electricity is so 
elastic in its demand that the ISO tells us that everytime you 
cut demand by one percent, the price for everybody goes down by 
five to ten percent. So, if you just do a little bit of good 
for the actual participants, you also help all of California's 
electricity bill enormously. 

But the actual answer to your question is, 40,000 
meters are going to cost like $40 million. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You're pretty good at physics. 
How is your math? What does that go to per meter? 



27 



DR. ROSENFELD: A thousand dollars a meter. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So, that's cheap. It's cheap 
if you're saving — 

DR. ROSENFELD: Let me amplify on cheap. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Inexpensive? 

DR. ROSENFELD: The ISO, California's 
Independent Systems Operator, has a program to reward people who 
conserve when they call on them. For a typical building, the 
smallest building that I want to go down to, the savings would 
probably be $10,000 to $20,000 a summer, and the meter only cost 
a thousand dollars. 

So, by cheap, in fact, Senator Burton, you mean 
real cheap. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: And it's no problem for the 
utilities to be tied into that? In other words, you take my 
meter and replace it with a real-time meter? 

DR. ROSENFELD: The utilities are going to have 
to scramble in their back offices to accommodate signals coming 
from 20,000 or 30,000 new telephone lines, or whatever, but it's 
something they can do by this July if they put their minds to 
it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Several questions. First of 
all, what is your expectation of the kinds of shortfalls in 
electricity that we may face this summer? And how do you 
account for the difference in projections from the Energy 
Commission and the ISO? 



28 



DR. ROSENFELD I think I'm not an expert in 
differences between the ISO and the Energy Commission. 

My general impression is, this summer is going to 
be touch and go. If everything goes right, and the weather is 
nice, we might scrape through. Things usually don't go right, 
and the weather might be bad, and we're going to have outages. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Isn't that one of Murphy's 
laws? If things can go wrong -- 

DR. ROSENFELD: Yes, sir, they will. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: What's this about rolling 
resistance of tires? What's the point? 

DR. ROSENFELD: That's not electricity, but we'll 
take a break from electricity. 

That's a real interesting story. It goes like 
this, that tires on new cars are pretty high tech. The car has 
to conform with the CAFE standards, and so the manufacturer's 
willing to buy the best tires he can. 

These tires, however, are not labeled by rolling 
resistance. And there was an attempt under the early days of 
the Clinton administration to get them labeled, but that 
failed. So, it turns out that after 50,000 miles, your tires 
wear out, and you drive into some wholesaler like Tire 
Discounts, or whatever, and you get some tires to fit your car. 
And nobody tells you that those tires have 20 percent worse 
rolling resistance than new tires. And they cost about five to 
ten dollars a set of tires less, so maybe you save 20 bucks. 

But when you roll out of that shop, your miles 
per gallon is down by five percent, but it's only two-thirds of 



29 



the cars that are running on used tires, so in fact for the 
fleet, it's a three percent effect. That's a huge, huge waste. 

It turns out that if you put the extra $20 into 
the tire, and saved all the gallons for the remaining 100,000 
miles, you would be paying — you would be saving gasoline at 
twelve cents a gallon, which is a hell of a lot better than 
paying a $1.20 for it at the pump. 

In terms of the total amount of gasoline supply, 
it's about twice what might come to the U.S. National Wildlife 
Refuge if we drill there. 

And so, my interest in this is, the federal 
Congress failed because of the power of actually B.F. Goodrich 
to get labels in place. But I want to talk to Senator Bowen 
and some friends about getting -- requiring labels in 
California . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: With respect, that I don't 
agree with you. You're looking at one factor. The rolling 
resistance, the pressures that the tire needs to produce that 
kind of rolling resistance has impact on ride and all sorts of 
other issues. To isolate out and say we're just going to talk 
about the rolling resistance on tires and the effect on gasoline 
mileage, I'm not sure I agree with you. 

Final point, there is in my district, and I noted 
that you made mention of it in your materials that you submitted 
to Committee, the proposed restart of a plant in Huntington 
Beach. Do you recall that? 

DR. ROSENFELD: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: There is an issue that has 



30 



arisen with respect to the potential relationship between fully 
licensed discharges from the Orange County Sanitation District, 
an outfall that goes some four miles off shore, and the presence 
of the plant, and the potential relationship between those two 
facilities with the high bacteria counts on the beach that have 
closed the beaches a number of times in the last couple of 
years . 

My question is, there's going to be study 
conducted by the sanitation district to determine if there is, 
in fact, some relationship between those two facilities and this 
problem on the beach. Senator Sher has, in a bill that is 
moving at this point, funding for a study to be conducted 
contemporaneously to see if there is, in fact, some 
relationship, what can and ought to be done about it. 

I'm interested in your reaction to that 
suggestion. 

DR. ROSENFELD: It would be ' lovely, of course, if 
there were no pressure in time. We could wait on the siting 
until that study is done. 

In fact, we are on a 60-day track. There clearly 
is -- 

SENATOR JOHNSON: My question, sir, is separate 
and distinct from the fast tracking of the plant itself, and 
rather, focused on the question of a contemporaneous study to 
look at if there, in fact, is a problem with this relationship 
between the two facilities, what can be done to deal with that, 
rather than waiting until that study is finished, and maybe the 
plant's on line, and then we say, "Oh, my gosh, yes, there is a 



31 



connection," and start from square one to devise a solution. 

Doesn't it make more sense to be looking at 
potential solutions contemporaneously? 

DR. ROSENFELD: Senator Johnson, I'm pretty much 
aware of this problem. I'm not sure how much I should discuss 
it here because I am on the siting committee. 

I can only say that if it turns out that there is 
a connection, the applicant has all ready stated that it expects 
to step in to remedy the situation. 

But I don't think I better talk about it any more 
simply because of my position on the siting committee. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Is there some national security 
thing involved in this? 

MR. LARSON: Steve Larson from the Energy 
Commission. 

Mr. Rosenfeld is the sitting member, the 
presiding member. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Right, I understand all that. 
But we got some national security thing at stake? 

MR. LARSON: Of course not. 

The only question is in terms of his comments on 
the case which he's hearing as a judge. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I'm sorry. Let me try again. 
I'm not asking for a comment on the case. I'm not asking for a 
comment on fast-tracking the application. 

Clearly, the folks who operate this plant and who 
are seeking to restart a couple of generators there are willing 
to run a considerable financial risk to have the dual tracking 



32 



of the construction and the application process. I'm not asking 
for a comment about that. 

I'm asking a separate, distinct issue. Doesn't 
it make sense for the State of California to, at the same time 
the sanitation district study is going forward, see if there's a 
connection, to conduct our own study to determine what, if 
anything, ought to be the solution, if there is a relationship 
established? That's all. 

And I'm not in any way asking you to comment on 
the application that's presently before you. I'm just saying, 
do you think it would be a good idea to have that kind of a 
study? 

DR. ROSENFELD: You bet, and the only thing I'm a 
little bit confused about is, there is all ready a study coming 
out of UC Santa Barbara, I think it is, and it's a sanitation 
district study. So, I sort of thought that two current studies 
was going to do the trick. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: The studies that are planned 
and haven't begun yet are to look at — and I apologize, Mr. 
Chairman. I don't mean to take up a whole afternoon on this — 
to determine if there's a relationship. If they conclude that 
there is a relationship, then, absent further action by us, 
we're left at square one at that point. 

That's all, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: I was looking back, and I was 
very impressed with Dr. Rosenfeld's educational background and 
the places he's been. 



33 



With those in mind, when I think about facilities 
and energy, I have a different concept than most of the people 
here. I think about things, and I know that Senator Bowen went 
to Michigan State. Then I see your University of Chicago 
credential in 1954. 

So, let me ask you, does this make sense to you, 
or does this sound like energy facilities: Alonzo Stagg, 
Soldiers Field. Do you relate to those? 

DR. ROSENFELD: I sure do. I chained my bike to 
the fence at Stagg Field every day for ten years in the snow. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Well, I'll tell you how old I 
am. I know the Wisconsin Fight Song used to be "Run the Ball 
Clear Around Chicago." 

[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Before Hutchins took them out 
o.f the Big Ten. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Now it's "On Wisconsin." 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Right. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I lived in Chicago, but I 
didn't play. I had to work at the Furniture Mart. Bet you know 
that building. 

I have a question. When you were talking about 
our summer, what's going to happen, and I agree with Senator 
Johnson that Murphy's Law will probably prevail, and we'll have 
all kinds of problems. 

There is a bill. Senator Sher has a bill that 



34 



would allow us to help the state help in that way. 

In what ways would that bill actually help? 
That's SB 5X. I don't know if you're familiar with it. But how 
would that help us work on conservation for the summer? 

I think people are probably going to see rolling 
blackouts from what you've said and from what other people have 
said. So, how would that bill help? 

DR. ROSENFELD: That's a fine question, because 
we thought about all the issues that are in 5X, because we've 
already been able to experiment with $50 million worth of 
appropriations, which came from the earlier AB 970. 

We believe that we can avoid a kilowatt for 
something like a hundred dollars; whereas, a new kilowatt 
installed, with transmission and distribution, is something like 
$400. So, we believe we're like four times cheaper, a lot 
faster, and certainly environmentally a lot better. 

And we've already got $50 million dollars worth 
of contracts in place under AB 970. We're all geared up to do 
10 times that much under 5X. 

We expect to work with thousands of buildings on 
thermostats, for example. We expect to do millions of white 
roofs, which each reduce the air conditioning load by 20 percent 
on the buildings. We intend to move off peak water and waste 
water pumping and put in more efficient pumps. 

And I'm going to turn this around and say, what 
we need is that appropriation soon, because summer is coming. 
And we're all set to deal with it as soon as it's available. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I have another question, if I 



35 



might . 

The problem with natural gas, I know that it's 
gone up. We didn't invest in natural gas drilling. There was a 
lack of it, at least from what I hear. 

Was the CEC tracking this, the natural gas 
problem? 

DR. ROSENFELD: I've seen CEC reports which are 
right up to date. Thankfully, drilling is way up. I mean, 
drilling was down to like 300 rigs as recently as six months 
ago, and it's like 900 rigs in the U.S. today. 

So, we're behind where we should be, but yes, the 
drilling is way up. In a couple of years, but not probably by 
next year, we're going to have a lot more gas. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: The forecast — 

DR. ROSENFELD: I'm guessing it's 18 months, two 
year problem. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I know that you forecast 
earlier that we were going to have problems, but somehow, people 
didn't hear it. Do you want to comment on that? 

DR. ROSENFELD: Listen, there are a lot of things 
that we know now. We should probably have voluntarily speeded 
up our siting procedures, for example, instead of waiting for 
the present crisis. But hindsight's always better than 
foresight . 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You say you have contracts on 
that. What kind of contracts do you enter into on the 
conservation? 



36 



DR. ROSENFELD: Oh, well, for example, just the 
very simplest one which I mentioned to Senator Karnette. 

It turns out that if you're going to reroof your 
commercial building, which has a flat roof anyway, if you choose 
white instead of dark, which costs you nothing, you'll save 20 
percent of the air conditioning load. 

But although it's a good idea, people just 
haven't been doing it. So, we've arranged with six regional 
offices to be in touch with the local roofing association, and 
we'll pay an average of ten cents a square foot incentive to the 
roofer if he will get the right color in place. This is an 
extremely effective way of saving peak power. 

But that's just one example of five sorts of 
contracts that we're doing. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I understand that the quickest, 
cheapest, and probably cleanest way to add power to do something 
is through the demand, but it seems to me that the taxpayers 
will be subsidizing maybe one of the wealthiest property owners 
in the nation to get him to do something. It doesn't matter 
what the hell color his roof is, because he's probably never 
been up there, and it would save him money in the long run. And 
we use taxpayers' money to subsidize him to do him, one, a 
favor; and two, kind of a no harm, no foul, but I guess that's 
like is the only way you can get it done or what? 

In other words, to listen to you and do it, as 
opposed to showing them that they'll save maybe 20 percent on 
their energy bills, which should be a sufficient subsidy anyway. 

DR. ROSENFELD: I can make two safe remarks. One 



37 



of them is yes, it's true that California's littered with things 
that have three-year payback that haven't been taken advantage 
of, and we're trying to stimulate them a little more. 

The other one is, this will really result in 
market transformation. That is, once we get the first fifth of 
the roofs done with incentive programs, all the roofers will 
know that this is a good trick. The materials will be in all 
the lumber yards. In residential properties, white shingles, 
really white shingles, will appear. They were made in the 
1960s, so we know how to make them. And that sort of market 
transformation eventually helps everybody. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's like, someone came in to 
see me, and it was like not megawatt, was it begawatt, or 
something. 

Anyway, they wanted, again, it was like have the 
taxpayers give them money to conserve, which saves them money. 
But they wanted us to pay to entice them to do something that, 
on a sound business basis, they should have done anyway because 
it would save them 20 percent. Boggles the mind. 

Witnesses in support, briefly. 

MR. WHITE: Thank you, Senator Burton, Members 
of the Committee. 

John White, representing the Clean Power 
Campaign, the Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense 
Council . 

We are thrilled to be here in support of Art 
Rosenfeld's confirmation. I think he is extraordinarily well 
qualified, as his testimony to this Committee has demonstrated. 



JB 



I think he is in a position to make an enormous contribution to 
the successful resolution of our energy problems. 

We urge an aye vote. 

MR. GLADFELTY: Mr. Chairman, Members, Paul 
Gladfelty, representing Lennox International. 

We also believe that Dr. Rosenfeld would be a 
fine nomination as well. 

MR. EDWARDS: Jon Edwards with the Professional 
Engineers in California Government. 

We strongly support this appointment. Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in opposition, if 
any. 

In support again. 

MR. PERNELL: Robert Pernell. I'm wearing two 
hats today. I'm also with the CEC, the California Energy 
Commission, and with the California State Council of Laborers. 

I've talked to my colleagues in labor, and they 
are in support of Commissioner Rosenfeld' s confirmation. 

I'm also here, he's a welcome addition to the 
Commission, so I would urge your support. 

Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Any opposition? Hearing none, 
moved by Senator Vincent. Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 



39 

SENATOR VINCENT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Vincent Aye. Senator Johnson 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Five to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 



[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
terminated at approximately 2:30 P.M.] 
--00O00 — 



40 

CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

n IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 

, 2001. 



JT day of n i {? , ■: / L 



/ 



] 1 - - / 



^tl 



/ / 

EVELYN J. MIZAK' 
Shorthand Reporter 



419-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 419-R when ordering. 



J* 

^HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

APR 1 6 2001 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2001 
1:32 P.M. 



420-R 



Reported by: 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 



ROOM 3191 



SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2001 



1:32 P.M. 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 
SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 
SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 
SENATOR ED VINCENT 

MEMBERS ABSENT 
SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

STAFF PRESENT 
GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 
SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 
TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 
CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 
CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 



ALSO PRESENT 



GEOFFREY F. BROWN, Member 
Public Utilities Commission 

SENATOR JACKIE SPEIER 

ASSEMBLYMEMBER KEVIN SHELLEY 



Ill 

INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

GEOFFREY F. BROWN, Member 

Public Utilities Commission 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR JACKIE SPEIER 4 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Telephone Area Codes 5 

Statement in Support by 

ASSEMBLYMEMBER KEVIN SHELLEY 7 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Should PUC Increase Rates to 

Cover Wholesale Cost of Power 9 

Effect of State Buying Power Grid 10 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Possibility of Consolidating PUC and 

CEC 11 

Motion to Confirm 12 

Committee Action 12 

Termination of Proceedings 12 

Certificate of Reporter 13 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Governor's appointees appearing 
today, Geoffrey Brown, Member of the Public Utilities 
Commission . 

Come on up, Jeff. 

Senator Speier was hopeful to be here to 
introduce Commissioner Brown. Unfortunately she was unable to 
be present. 

We have your statement. Why don't you just make 
a comment for the record, then if there's questions. 

MR. BROWN: Thank you very much for hearing me at 
an early date. 

I would like first, before I get started, if I 
could take the privilege of introducing my wife, Ditna, and my 
daughter, Miranda. Miranda's a student at the University of 
California. She's finishing her Ph.D. and getting married 
pretty soon, and she came up here today, took time off. 

I'd also like to thank the members of my 
Commission that have come here, fellow Commissioners. I see 
Carl Wood. There's members of the staff here that are too 
numerous to recite, but they came to offer some moral support 
and technical assistance as I went around and talked to you. 

And of course, I'd like to thank the Governor, 
of course, for giving me this great honor and this great 
responsibility. 

I have served now as an unconfirmed Commissioner 
for almost two months. I came to the Commission at a time of 



great crisis in the electricity market in California. With a 
little allowance for the learning curve, I have participated in 
decisions that go to the ability of California utilities not 
just to operate in a reliable manner, but their ability to 
operate at all. This is no small responsibility. 

And in my short and conditional tenure, I've also 
been involved in the telecommunications issue, particularly the 
effort to establish competitive markets and long distance and 
local telephone service. And I assume that in the not too 
distant future, the Commission will also be deeply involved in 
water regulation. 

If the California Public Utilities Commission is 
to do its job of assuring the delivery of essential services and 
protection of California consumers, Commissioners must be 
available to all views, whether they are from rate payers, 
utility workers, or the regulated industries themselves. 

In the time that I have been on the Commission, 
I've endeavored to open my door to all concerned parties, 
including individual rate payers. As a Commissioner, I intend 
to make myself available to Californians throughout the state 
and to go throughout the state to listen, to explain the work of 
the Commission, and to listen to what their feelings are about 
the work of the Commission. My accessibility, I believe, will 
better inform my work at the PUC and permit me to forge policies 
that serve the greater good, rather than any given parochial 
interest . 

As a Commissioner, one must give one's self 
completely to the extraordinary complex body of subject matter. 



The job requires a willingness to master issues that are both 
voluminous and complex, and the humility to seek counsel on 
matters where you are uninformed. 

As a Commissioner, one must be a good 
adjudicator. One must know how to evaluate the strength of the 
case, and to insist that the conclusions of law match the facts 
presented. This often requires that one decline to do what one 
wants to because, for whatever reason, a case has not been 
proven. 

If I have any bias at all, it is that due 
process, procedural and substantive, be the order of the day. 
Formalities that the court observe and the Commission observe 
are often too numerous and restrictive. Nonetheless, I hope 
that at the end of the day, parties who come before the 
Commission, whoever they may be, will say that they got a fair 
hearing with adequate time to prepare and to present their 
case. If this means that the Commission's actions are mediated 
by procedural fairness, I believe it is well worthwhile in the 
long run. 

After 30 years as a lawyer, after 22 years as an 
administrator of a major department of government -- and I won't 
say which one, Senator -- and as a law school adjunct professor, 
I believe I have the experience that will ultimately redound to 
the benefit of the public. 

I'm anxious to serve the state at a critical time 
in its history. It is obvious that we must keep the lights on, 
but we must do more than that. California must be 
environmentally whole, and its utility infrastructure must be 



intact and efficient if its citizens are to prosper. 

To those efforts and to those ends I dedicate 
myself unstintingly to a fair, efficient, and accessible market 
for basic utilities. 

Thank you very much. I'll be glad to take any 
questions . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: We have Senator Speier, and I 
thought I saw Kevin Shelley. 

Senator Speier, we started prior to you. 

SENATOR SPEIER: You probably started promptly. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Exactly, and you can be the 
after main event. 

MR. BROWN: I'm very grateful that you are here, 
Senator Speier. 

SENATOR SPEIER: Mr. Chairman and Members, it's 
really a privilege to be able to do my introduction at the end 
of the statement made by Commissioner appointee Jeff Brown. As 
you can tell by his statement, I think he is bringing to bear 
his many years as the Public Defender in San Francisco and his 
legal background to the Commission so that fairness and equity 
will be the watch words of his tenure there. 

I can also tell you, having talked to many of the 
utilities in the last couple of weeks -- believe it or not, they 
still have issues before the Utilities Committee -- they are 
astonished at the energy level of the Commissioner and his 
interest in wanting to get his hands dirty very quickly in terms 
of addressing the many issues that are before the Commission. 

So, not only is there someone who is going to be 



fair and equitable, there's someone who has a lot of energy to 
bring to this office, no pun intended, and a commitment, I 
think, to do a very good job. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I want to ask a question that 
surprised me. I'm so sick of electricity and energy. 

I want to ask you about telephone area codes. 

MR. BROWN: Yes. In fact, I get more questions 
about that than I do about energy. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'll tell you, if you spend any 
time down in L.A., you get a ton of them. 

I'm just reading our area code, 415. It says 
that there's 7.7 million usable numbers in our area, which is 
basically -- what would that be -- just San Francisco and Marin? 

MR. BROWN: San Francisco, Marin, part of 
northern San Mateo County, just a little smidgen there, and then 
that's it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So there's 7 million numbers. 
Half of them are not in use; 22 million numbers in the 415 area 
code . 

How the hell can you have 7.7 million numbers, 
and then 22 million numbers available? It seems weird. 

In other words, companies hold these deals. Is 
there any way to have them on either a use-it-or-lose-it , or get 
those back? 

They say that one of the reasons for the 
explosion in area codes are really the faxes and the cell 
phones, that kind of stuff. 

MR. SCHMIDT: It should be 2.2 million. 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Two point two, okay. A decimal 
here, a decimal there; it doesn't matter, I guess. 

Is there any way we can get some of those back? 
Or, if it's going to be a cell phone, then let the ones keep it 
where they are now, but let the new ones pick it up. 

I imagine San Francisco will always be 415. I 
don't think we'll ever have enough to split it. But L.A. went 
from 213, then 818, then 310, to 323, and probably going 
somewhere else. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: There's 5 62. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes, 562 where Senator Karnette 
is . 

These guys are just sitting on a bunch of 
numbers, and they don't use them. Do you guys have the 
authority? 

MR. BROWN: Yes, we do have the authority, and we 
have a whole section of our telecommunications effort devoted to 
area codes. It's a big issue. 

There's a lot of things that are happening that 
are beneficial. We have what we call conservation; area code 
conservation, where we -- for example, if numbers are given out 
by a carrier, they're not given out in blocks of ten thousand. 
They're given out in blocks of a thousand so that they don't 
become lost. 

There's been a voluntary system down in the 310 
area, as I understand it, where competitors can draw from a 
pool. In other words, there's a common pool of numbers. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What are they going to do with 



ten thousand numbers? Who gets those? 

MR. BROWN: Well, if you're a big enough 
business, I guess you can do that. In other words, a company 
could have that amount of numbers, a telephone company. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Pretty big business. 

MR. BROWN: Yeah. 

The other thing is, for example, one of the 
things that is occurring is that there is a squeeze out. 
There's a real effort to squeeze out those unused, those dormant 
numbers . 

And finally, I think there's number portability. 
For example, if you lived in Marin County in 1950, you would 
have, what, Glencourt. You couldn't take that to San Francisco 
if you moved back to San Francisco. Today you have portability 
within that area code, which contributes to conservation. 

So, the name of the game is conservation. We 
could have had, if the Commission didn't embark upon its 
business, 40 area codes. Now we have what in California, 25? I 
mean, I think that there's a major effort on the part of the 
carriers as well as the Commission to see whether we can just 
restrict the numbers of telephones. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'm trying to think: 415, 707, 
916, 209. That took you all the way down to the Tehachapis, and 
then 213, 805, 619, and that was it. 

Mr. Shelley was here and wanted to make a few 
comments also. 

ASSEMBLYMEMBER SHELLEY: Thank you very much, 
Mr. Chairman and Members. 



8 



Just on behalf of Mr. Brown, I'd like to, in 
essence, as a constituent, introduce him to the Committee. I 
know he's done that quite equitably himself, but simply to 
mention the unusual fact that, notwithstanding Mr. Brown's 
initial election in a contested race in 1978 in San Francisco, 
albeit with 75 percent of the vote, since that time for every 
four-year stint he has been up for election as Public Defender 
unopposed. And as the Pro Tern and Sheriff certainly knows, and 
those of you who follow San Francisco politics, that is a rather 
extraordinary feat I think it is a tribute to the respect with 
which he is held by his colleagues, his staff, his co-workers, 
and certainly the people of San Francisco. And it should not be 
ignored, and in fact, should be recognized. 

I'd also like to simply point out that in this 
particularly delicate period that the PUC is involved in now 
involving the energy issue, Mr. Brown's skills as a negotiator 
and a mediator, skills well regarded and well respected in San 
Francisco and beyond, will be well applied to the matter of 
negotiations involving contracts and the like, since that is an 
issue that certainly the PUC could, perhaps, gain that extra 
additional support. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you very much. 

MR. BROWN: Thank you. I appreciate Assemblyman 
Shelley coming in and saying good things about me. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: We don't have the 805 any more. 
We gave that up, and it's all over to the west. We've 760, 661. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You only got two? 



9 



SENATOR KNIGHT: I don't remember the others. I 
got a good sized area that goes from Santa Clarita to Bishop, 
Tehachapi to Needles. It covers a lot of ground. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You ought to be a pilot. You 
could fly it. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Hey, you know, if somebody would 
give me an airplane, I would sure appreciate it. They're a 
little expensive to own, but I could still manage. 

I'd like you to indicate whether the PUC should 
increase the rates to cover the wholesale cost of power. And if 
you believe it should not, how do you propose to cover the 
excess of cost over rates? 

ASSEMBLYMEMBER SHELLEY: I'm sorry, I have to 
leave now. Pleasure being here. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. BROWN: Senator, you asked the 64 dollar 
question . 

The first thing I think we have to do is, we have 
to really stop the bleeding. And utilities are really bleeding 
at the present time. 

I think the only way that rates can be avoided is 
that if the price of natural gas decreases, if there's more 
hydroelectric power, and perhaps this QF issue is resolved so 
that the payments that the utilities make to the QFs are 
reduced. And I believe Assemblyman Battin has a bill to that 
effect . 

I mean, if we add, if we conserve and add, we 
might be able to avoid it. But we are faced with very, very 



10 



difficult times. 

I mean, you know, customers are buying power at 
less than what the cost is for the utilities. And that bleeding 
that's going on is really piling up tremendous debt which has to 
be handled. You know, we can take them out of debt for a while, 
but the question is, can we drop that spread between cost and 
the purchase by customers. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: But as a follow-on, how does 
buying the grid help us in that arena? 

MR. BROWN: It helps only in this sense, as I 
understand it. It allows the utilities that sell the grid to 
have some cash in order to pay off an accumulated debt. 

What it doesn't do is stave the bleeding. So, 
the question then is whether the State of California can manage 
the grid. I mean, I assume that it can, or it wouldn't have 
undertaken it. 

But we have to deal with the long-term problem, 
Senator. Your question implies that, and you're absolutely 
right about that. 

But it's going to take a very happy coincidence 
of those factors in order to avoid a rate increase. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I don't see how you can get out 



of it 



that 



MR. BROWN: We're going to have to take a look at 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Vincent. 
SENATOR VINCENT: No questions. 
CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 



11 



SENATOR KARNETTE: I'd like to follow-up a little 
bit on what Senator Knight questioned. 

I want to know if you think it would help if we 
combined, we'd be better served if we had one agency overseeing 
things, rather than so many? 

MR. BROWN: Well, initially we did have one 
agency. We had the PUC doing what the Energy Commission does 
now and also what it does today. Then we split it off in the 
Jerry Brown administration, as I remember. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Actually, I think it was 
Reagan . 

MR. BROWN: That's right, because the first 
chairman was Bob Moretti. 

So, we split it off. Now, the problem for the 
PUC is, it's got a lot of work just doing what it does. If you 
had to take on the work of the Energy Commission, it might lose 
its focus. 

What I would suggest when we talked about this is 
that we have kind of a coordinating agency or council to 
coordinate this activity so we don't one agency doing one thing, 
and another agency doing something else. We're all in sync with 
one another. 

I think coordinating policy is real hard. That 
was what Commissioner Bilas really suggested recently. One of 
the problems is that we don't have -- it's very hard to have a 
coordinated and coherent policy if you spread the 
responsibility. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support. 



12 



Witnesses in opposition. 

Pleasure of the Committee. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Vincent Aye. Senator Johnson. 
Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Four to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 

MR. BROWN: Thank you. I appreciate the courtesy 
•all of you have extended in coming to your offices and having a 
chance to talk to you. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 

Senate Rules Committee hearing was 

terminated at approximately 1:52 P.M.] 
--00O00-- 



1J 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 



I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of . California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 

, 2001. 



/ day of J") V;'/ ;- 




- I 



I fa Is/. 



•EVELYN J. MIZAK 
Shorthand Reporter 



420-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 420-R when ordering. 



^HEARING 

SENATE^RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

APR 1 6 2001 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2001 
1:33 P.M. 



421 -R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2001 
1:33 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 



SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 
SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 
SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 
SENATOR ED VINCENT 



MEMBER ABSENT 
SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

STAFF PRESENT 
GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 
BILL BAILEY, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 
TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 
CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 
CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 

ALSO PRESENT 

JERRY L. HARPER, Director 
Youth Authority 

SENATOR RICHARD POLANCO 

STEVE WHITE, Inspector General 

ROY MABRY 

California Association of Black Correctional Workers 

LOUIE ADAME, State Vice President 

California Correctional Peace Officers Association 

RICHARD RIOS, Vice Chair, Bargaining Unit 3 
California State Employees Association 



Ill 



RAUL GALINDO, Vice Chair 
Youthful Offender Parole Board 

MICHAEL FLORES, Member 
Fish and Game Commission 

JOHN McCAULL, State Legislative Director 
National Audubon Society 

JIM KELLOGG 

Building and Construction Trades Council and 

Northern California Outdoor Sportsman's Coalition 

CHARLES RYAN 

National Wild Turkey Federation 

JAMES R. OATES, D.D.S. 

MARK HENNELLY 

California Waterfowl Association 

JENNIFER ERICKSON 

National Wild Turkey Federation 

BILL GEYER, Executive Director 
Resource Landowners Coalition 

ROBERT P. HOUSTON 

East Bay Regional Park District 

BILL ALLAYAUD 

Sierra Club California 

ERIC MILLS, Coordinator 
Action for Animals 

ALAN BERGER, Executive Director 
Animal Protection Institute 

VIRGINIA HANDLEY 
The Fund for Animals 

KAREN RAASCH 

California Federation for Animal Legislation 



3 

4 

s 

6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



LAWRENCE WEISS 

Sonoma People for Animals 

ROSE LERNBERG 

Contra Costa Humane Society 



V 

INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

JERRY L. HARPER, Director 

Youth Authority 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Improper Treatment of Wards with 

Mental Health Problems 2 

High Number of Class Closures at 

Nelles Institution 5 

Ward in Lockdown for 590 Days 6 

Predecessor 7 

Need for More Staff to Handle Increase in 

Mental Health Beds 8 

Unusually Long Drug Treatment Program 9 

Labor Concerns Regarding Lack of 

Training of New Hires, Etc 11 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Number of Staff Vacancies 12 

Staff Recruitment and Retention Problems 12 

Use of Monies Budgeted for Vacancies 12 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Lack of Data on Recidivism 14 



15 
16 

17 
18 
19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Statements by SENATOR VINCENT re: 

High Rate of Recidivism 16 : 

Filling Vacant Positions 17 

Senator' s Support for Tough Job 17 

Introduction of Family and Staff 18 

Witnesses in Support: 

SENATOR RICHARD POLANCO 19 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

g STEVE WHITE, Inspector General 19 

10 ROY MABRY 

Association of Black Correctional Workers 21 

ll 

12 
13 



LOUIE ADAME, State Vice President 

California Correctional Peace Officers Association ... 22 



RICHARD RIOS, Vice Chair 
14 Bargaining Unit 3 

California State Employees Association 24 



RAUL GALINDO, Vice Chair 

Youthful Offender Parole Board 26 

Motion to Confirm 26 

Committee Action 27 

MICHAEL FLORES, Member 

Fish and Game Commission 27 

Background and Experience 27 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Would Like to See More Wilderness and 

Wildlife 30 

Problems with Over Fishing 30 

Sufficiency in Number of Game Wardens 31 



VI 1 



Role of Commission in Protecting 

Endangered Species 32 

Statements by SENATOR VINCENT re: 

Not in Favor of Hunting Animals 33 

Difficulty Supporting Appointment 33 

Response by MR. FLORES 34 

Witnesses in Support : 

SENATOR RICHARD POLANCO 3 7 

JOHN McCAULL, State Legislative Director 

National Audubon society 38 

JIM KELLOGG 

State Building and Constructions Trades Council 

Northern California Outdoor Sportman's 

Coalition 39 

CHARLES RYAN 

National Wild Turkey Federation 39 

JIM OATES, D.D.S. 

Sacramento Dentist 41 

MARK HENNELLY 

California Waterfowl Association 41 

JENNIFER ERICKSON 

National Wild Turkey Federation 42 

BILL GEYER, Executive Director 

Resource Landowners Coalition 42 

BOB HOUSTON 

East Bay Regional Park District 43 

BILL ALLAYAUD 

Sierra Club California 43 

Witnesses in Opposition: 

ERIC MILLS, Coordinator 

Action for Animals, Oakland 43 



Vll] 



ALAN BERGER, Executive Director 

Animal Protection Institute 46 

VIRGINIA HANDLEY 

Fund for Animals 48 

KAREN RAASCH 

California Federation for Animal Legislation 52 

b LARRY WEISS 

Sonoma People for Animals 53 



7 
8 

10 
II 
12 
13 

14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



ROSE LERNBERG 

Contra Costa Humane Society 53 

Statements by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Need for Hunting to Control 

Deer Population 54 

Motion to Confirm 55 

Introduction of Family and Staff 55 

Committee Action 56 

Termination of Proceedings 56 

Certificate of Reporter 57 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--O0O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Jerry Harper, Director of the 
Youth Authority. 

MR. HARPER: Good afternoon. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Go ahead, please. 

MR. HARPER: I'll make a very short opening 
statement . 

I have been with the Youth Authority now as the 
Director for some ten months. And I come from Southern 
California by way of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's 
Department, where I served some 37 years, the last six years as 
the Undersheriff for Sheriff Sherman Block. 

And in the year-and-a-half after the 37 years in 
the Sheriff's Department, I spent as a consultant and a teacher, 
traveling across the nation and overseas, teaching various 
subjects . 

In May of last year, I accepted the job as the 
Director of the Youth Authority, and I'm very proud that I have 
done that. I've been associated with some wonderful people, and 
I'd like to continue that association and continue the momentum 
of some of the projects and things that we have under way. 

That's all I have to say now. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: There's several concerns that 
some of the Members have, and me specifically, with what's been 
happening at the CYA. One of the most serious concerns is 
mental health treatment. 

It's been noted that CYA needs to do a better job 



of identifying the wards who need help, making sure that they 

2 get it, and not just medication but treatment. 

The role in statute of the CYA is to rehabilitat 
youth, and many of us feel that hasn't been happening as it 
should. Wards with serious mental health problems are all too 
often mixed in with sex offenders and developmentally disabled. 
There's a question of the drug and alcohol programs. 

8 And if we have these people not getting proper 

treatment, and then they get out, and they come back in the 
community, you might not see them again, but once they reach th( 
age of 21, somebody's going to see them in state prison. 

12 We are very, very concerned about the mental 

13 health aspects of what's going on there. If you might comment, 

14 we've had a ward who tried suicide at Preston. The psychologis" 

15 has a caseload of 350 wards. 

16 You yourself have stated that mental health is a 

17 patchwork of treatment programs, not standard, that there's gap 

18 in resources, and no organized continuum of care. 

19 How are you going to deal with this? What can 
you do with existing resources? Or are you going to ask the 

21 Governor or the Budget Committee for more resources to deal wit 

22 this? 

23 MR. HARPER: Let me start with the last one 

24 first. 

25 The subject of mental health is something that w 

26 have made as a priority. Shortly after I became the Director, 
we took the senior staff to a session nearby, and we spent two 
days talking about the concerns, problems, issues in the Youth 



, 



Authority. 

One of the primary concerns that we had at that 
time and still have is mental health. Of course, that covers a 
wide range of things. And we talk about mental health, as 
mental health per se, as sex offender treatment, and even to 
some extent as drug abuse treatment. 

One of the answers has to be that we have to do 
everything within our own resources to identify the problems, to 
sort out the different populations. You mentioned, Senator, 
that we have some people mixed in who have mental health 
problems and sex offenders. Unfortunately, a number of our 
young people have both mental health and sex offender problems. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: We do not have trouble with 
mixing people with themselves. It's just mixing them with 
somebody else. 

MR. HARPER: Right, I understand I just wanted 
to make that point clear. Some of these young people have 
multiple problems. That makes it much more difficult to deal 
with . 

And you also mentioned suicide. We did have a 
tragedy within the last four weeks, and we have been looking at 
what we call Suicide Prevention Assessment and Response, and 
trying to harden that target in a number of ways. 

The Governor in his budget has some 75 beds that 
would be for purposes of mental health treatment. Those beds 
would go at our Preston Institute for younger men. 

And frankly, we have a category that may be 
relatively new to some of you. I'm not sure if you've heard of 






the term, aggressively mentally health. It's a term that's 
2 being used more frequently across the nation. 

We have been discussing that a lot in terms of 
what we can do about that, how we can deal with this particular 
special population. We believe that the 75 beds that are 
designated for us in the Governor's budget are going to help us 
deal with that particular population. 

We also have in the Governor's budget some 
additional monies for what we call continuum of care. That is, 
we have a number of these young people who get out of the 
institutions and they need treatment or help once they get out. 
Parole Services provides that, and quite frankly, we haven't had 
enough money and enough resources to do that. The Governor's 

14 budget is also providing additional monies for that. 

15 In the area of sex offenders, we have some 50 

16 beds that are being recommended in the Governor's budget, and 
those will help us also deal with actually a population of younc 
men and women, but almost exclusively men, which is growing. 

19 If we look at the change in the nature of the 

population over the last ten years with regard to the wards at 

21 the Youth Authority, I would have to say that we have had more 
young people who have showed up with mental health problems. 

23 More of our population, a higher percentage of our population, 

24 are sex offenders. And we also have a higher percentage of our 

25 people who are involved in gangs, which is also a different 

26 problem. 

27 So, we're trying to deal with all these, and I 

28 think the Governor's budget is going to help us in that regard 



That's not to say that it does everything that needs to be 
done. I think it's an incremental, phased-in approach. We're 
going to have to measure that and see what the effects are. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: There was a management audit at 
Nelles Institution that there were a high level number of class 
closures due to what our staff says -- like, in a one-month 
period, there were 886 class periods cancelled due to, guote, 
"trade holds" which can mean anything from teacher shortage, 
security issues, et cetera. 

That seems like hell of a lot of classes to be 
cancelled? 

MR. HARPER: Yes, sir. A combination of reasons 
for that. 

One of the reasons has to do with teachers and 
availability of substitutes as well as teachers. That is a 
problem for us. 

One of the problems we have, particularly in 
Southern California, has to do with the disparity between the 
teachers' salaries and some of their fringe benefits and those 
in the public sector. 

We have -- the Senator recently had a meeting 
with Mr. Morganstern over at the Department of Personnel 
Administration to bring his attention to this problem. 

Some of those people -- or some of those classes 
were cancelled because we didn't have teachers available to 
teach the classes. 

I should mention, though, that I think that you 
mentioned that that information came from the Office of 



1 Inspector General. 

2 CHAIRMAN BURTON: I just said it was an audit. 

MR. HARPER: I think it was an OIG report. 

m I would say that that number of people, and that 

number of cancellations is a very serious problem, and that is 

6 unacceptable. That is something that we are dealing with. 
Obviously, we need some help on that. 

8 The one issue I've dealt with, with the Senator, 

and I know he's dealing with the Governor's Office on that, and 
other aspects of it have to do with just some internal -- 

11 CHAIRMAN BURTON: Which Senator? 

12 MR. HARPER: I'm sorry. I keep referring to him 
as the Senator. Senator Presley, sir, the Secretary. 

14 CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's a great title, isn't it, 

15 Bob? Once you've got it, it's there for life. 

16 MR. HARPER: Again, what I want to say is, that 

17 is unacceptable to us, and we are taking steps to make some 
strides to improve that. Part of it has to do with some 
management problems at the institution itself. We can't blame 
it all on teacher shortages. Certainly some of it is, and some 

21 of it, we have to get the teachers and the administration, 

security people, to work better together down there. And we 

23 have had several meetings on that. We're going to have some 

24 follow-up meetings on that. 

25 So, I think the short answer is, I expect that to 

26 improve significantly. 

27 CHAIRMAN BURTON: When our staff went down to the 

28 Nelles facility in January, they found out that there was a ward 



in lockdown for 590 days who had, like, an 83 IQ. 

Doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to me. 

MR. HARPER: There have been several wards, not 
quite with that lengthy stay, who've been brought to my 
attention . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Isn't that just an easy way to 
deal with somebody? You may not have to do something for them 
by putting them in lockdown? 

MR. HARPER: No, sir. I don't believe that 
that's an easy way of doing it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They don't have to do much. 

MR. HARPER: Actually, you have to pay closer 
attention to them when they're in lockup than you do when 
they're on a living unit and when they're in the open dorm. So, 
it actually is more of a problem when we have young people in 
lockups for a whole lot of reasons. 

One of the major efforts that we have had 
undertaken is a whole look at this, what we call 23 and 1. It's 
an umbrella for several terms that deal with the young men and 
women who are in lockup. Generally they are there because they 
are a danger to others. If we look at the statistics, and we 
look at the numbers, when I first came into the agency, first of 
all, we did not have good numbers. We didn't know how many 
people we had on lockdown. 

One of the steps that we have taken is that we 
now know how many we have -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Who had the job before you? 

MR. HARPER: The Director before, my predecessor 



was Director Zermeno, sir. And before him, Frank Alarcon. 
2 CHAIRMAN BURTON: They must have done great jobs 

if they couldn't keep track of their people. That'd be the easy 
•; part of it; wouldn't it? 

MR. HARPER: Well, the only comment I would say 
6 is that currently -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You don't have to. It ' s a 

8 rhetorical question. 

9 MR. HARPER: At any rate, we have been keeping 
track. We now have improved our computer base so that we can 
keep weekly track of the individuals, how long they have been in 
the lockup, whether they are on temporary detention or what we 

13 call special management unit, which is a different program but 

14 they're still in lockup. 

15 Those numbers have been coming down. When we die 

16 finally get a good count on them, they were at about 800 or 

17 800-plus. Those numbers now are down into the mid-500s. As far 

18 as I'm concerned, still too high. I can't tell you' what the 

19 bottom line number should be, but I can tell you that that is a 
major effort of ours. And we have probably spent as much time 

21 on that as any one subject -- as any other subject that we have,! 

22 and we're going to continue to focus on that so that we don't 

23 have repeats like this. 

24 CHAIRMAN BURTON: The budget's going to have 75 
new mental health beds. What's that do for a guy with a 350 to 

26 1 caseload? 

27 MR. HARPER: I'm not quite sure I understand you 

28 question. 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: I think that the psychologist 
at Preston who treated the ward who was trying to commit suicide 
has a caseload of 350 to 1. He's one; there's 350. So, even if 
you get the beds, what's that going to do to reduce -- 

MR. HARPER: I think it will help. It's not just 
that 75 beds, but it's also the 50 beds -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: But you're not doing anything 
about the caseload. In other words, it would seem more beds -- 

MR. HARPER: With the 75 beds, we also bring on 
more staff, so more psychologists, more counselors. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: All right, fine. Just a couple 
others . 

Following up to the conversation that I had with 
Senator Presley and I forget whom, where I was just astounded 
that you have a nine to twelve-month drug treatment program. 
Then we find out that the program's only three hours a week, 
which means if you really want to stretch it out, you could do 
it one hour a week and maybe keep them in for three years. 

It makes no sense to me. Never has since I heard 
about it. 

I wonder what you're doing to look into that, as 
to how to shorten the period? I think, one, as I understood it 
from whoever it was, people were waiting to get in. They 
couldn't get in until somebody got out. And again as I 
understood it, which astounded me a bit, is that people couldn't 
get in, and then they were kept in CYA for longer periods of 
time than might be necessary because they couldn't complete this 
nine-month program. 



10 



1 I absolutely, and I say this to the Secretary, to 

2 you, I want something done about that program. I want the 
program shortened. It just make no sense to me to have, you 
know, an hour-and-a-half twice a week for nine months with other 
people waiting to get in. I don't know what hell else these 

6 kids are doing there. 

But I would think that most of the treatment 
programs that I talked about, that were 21 to 28 days in length, 
you were in a program in one form or another, whether it was 
group, whether it individual counseling, whether it was an NA, 

11 PA, AA program, and that's what you did. And then the program 

12 lasts for between three to four weeks, and you're through with 
that part of the program. Then for the rest of your life, 

14 you're trying just not to partake in whatever got you into the 

15 program. 

16 But if I don't see -- and this is for you, 

17 Mr. Secretary -- if I don't see a change in that program through 

18 this fiscal year, as far as I'm concerned, you can whistle next 

19 year about a budget because it ain't going to be there. This 

20 makes no sense to me. 
11 I do not know much about much, but this is one 

22 area where I know a little bit about. And if there was time on 

23 everybody's hands, and nobody was waiting to get in, and 

24 nobody's time was extended because they couldn't get in because 
you had this long program — no harm, no foul — then who cares 

26 whether it works or not. 

27 I think it's fiscally irresponsible, and I think 

28 than it clearly doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense to have 






11 



people waiting in line for a program that's been stretched out 
because we've always done it that way. 

We've had that conversation, Jerry, so you don't 
need to respond. Proof of the pudding is going to be in the 
eating, not in what anybody says. 

Couple things that some of the employees were a 
little bit concerned about is that some of the teachers, and I'd 
like comment on this, hired started working without the 
follow-up training in safety and security procedures, even 
though that's mandated by your policy. That's one. 

Changes in the ward disciplinary process, that 
the staff hasn't been given the training to either understand or 
implement it . 

There's not been affirmative action to correct 
the problems associated with outdated or poorly operating 
personal alarm systems. 

Then there's one that's basically a labor thing 
about vacating binding arb in the matter of Kendlyn Rose versus 
CYA regarding the education staff being sent to provide 
educational services in housing units. 

However, just so you feel good, that was four 
deals, and there were five commendations by the same group. So, 
you're ahead five-to-four, but they've got some concerns that I 
think should be addressed. 

We can make this available to you without 
commenting, because we have all sorts of people come here, and 
they say all sorts of stuff, and it's all going to be wonderful, 
and then when we get into the budget problem, it's still a 



12 



1 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



problem. 



We'll get that to you, Jerry. 

Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I'm glad you got five atta-boys. 

MR. HARPER: Kiss me on one cheek and slap me on 



the other 



SENATOR KNIGHT: I want to know how many 
vacancies do you have on your staff? 

MR. HARPER: It depends on the category, of 
course. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Overall in the whole Department? 

MR. HARPER: Overall in the whole Department, 
probably a little over 400; 450 if we include teachers, 
corrections officers, youth counselors. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Do you have trouble filling 
those positions? 

MR. HARPER: Yes, we do, especially in certain 
categories. Some of the more critical categories are the 
psychologists and psychiatrists. Right now, we have about 
almost a 40 percent vacancy factor in our 15 psychiatric 
positions . 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aren't you budgeted to include 
those 400 vacancies? 

MR. HARPER: Yes, sir, we are budgeted for those. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: What do you do with the money? 

MR. HARPER: In some cases we pay overtime to 
fill behind, and that's how we staff, particularly the post 



13 



assignments. The teaching assignments, we bring on substitute 
teachers . 

SENATOR KNIGHT: So you use that money? 

MR. HARPER: Yes, we use that money. In fact, 
we'd like to have more money to use for that purpose. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, and more spaces, I'm 
sure, allocated? 

MR. HARPER: More spaces? I'm not sure what you 
mean by spaces? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, the 400 vacancies 
obviously are covered by spaces allocated to you. 

MR. HARPER: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: So, if you added more spaces, 
there would be more allocation and more funding coming; right? 

MR. HARPER: That's correct, yes, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: To cover new salaries. 

MR. HARPER: New salaries, possibly. Again, I'm 
not into the DPA negotiating aspect of this thing. I would just 
say that we definitely have some shortages; we definitely have 
some disparities that I believe -- 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I understand you've got 
shortages if you've got 400 vacancies. 

MR. HARPER: Right. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Yet, you're going to want some 
more . 

MR. HARPER: No, actually, my priorities would be 
to fill the ones we've got first. But by the same token, if we 
are able to take care of some of the disparities with what we 



14 






call retention and recruitment bonuses, and salaries for the 
teachers, salaries for the psychologists, and some of the other 
groups, we will be able to fill these vacancies. 

4 And yes, we still need more people on top of 

5 that. 

6 SENATOR KNIGHT: Okay, thank you. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: When we talked earlier, I am 
real concerned about the fact that we don't know how many 
people, young people, who leave CYA, whether or not they ever 

10 return. Since it is a rehabilitative idea -- the idea is that 
we rehabilitate these young people -- do you have any plans for 

12 getting better data? We can't really evaluate whether or not 
we're successful in rehabilitation, which is what I want to 

14 happen, until we have better data. 

15 What are your plans for improving the data 

16 gathering? 

17 MR. HARPER: Well, first of all, let me say that 

18 right now, our recidivism rate is about 44 percent for the young 
men, and about 23 to 24 percent for the young women, but it 

20 varies quite a bit. 

21 SENATOR KARNETTE: But that's for just a short 

22 time? 

23 MR. HARPER: It is, yes, ma'am. Yes, Senator, 

24 excuse me. That's my midwestern upbringing. 

25 SENATOR KARNETTE: It's all right. I don't mind 

26 MR. HARPER: Yes, the time — the maximum time 
that we could have them would be two years on parole. 

28 Unfortunately, a number of them, because of different reasons, 



15 



time adds and things like that, do not have a full two years 
when they get out on parole. 

The other thing is that we have no way of really 
tracking them once that two-year period is up. Once they leave 
parole, we have no formal way of tracking them. 

So, we could tell you what the rates are for that 
two-year period, but beyond that, we can only tell you by way of 
anecdotal stories and things like that as to whether we have had 
successes or failures, because some of these young people come 
back and talk to us or make phone calls to their staff, and 
things like that, and let us know. But there's really very 
little hard scientific data beyond that first two years. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Is there some way that we can 
improve the situation? 

MR. HARPER: I think one of the things that we 
can do is, certainly we want to take advantage of all the 
literature that's out there, but we also -- I would like to be 
able to do some sampling, take some small samples, and so forth, 
and try to do that, and particularly break it down based upon 
whether the individual had primarily a substance abuse problem, 
or a sex offender problem, or a mental health problem, so that 
we can not only give you that data, but break it down based upon 
the different categories which correspond to the basic treatment 
areas that we have. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: If we could actually make the 
treatment fit the crime, so to speak, we might be much more 
successful. 

MR. HARPER: Absolutely. I totally agree with 



16 






1 that. 

2 SENATOR KNIGHT: Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Listening to this is very 

frustrating. With all due respect to Mr. Harper, I look at some 
of the people who recommended him, and I think so much of them, 
6 and I think so much of him, too, as person. 

But the whole system itself to me is troubling. 
I know that Senator Knight is a great person in aviation, and I 
9 know that Senator Karnette is the educator. 
10 But I've spent as much time in the Probation 

Department as you've spent in the Sheriff's Department. 
12 MR. HARPER: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR VINCENT: And I also know that probation 

14 is rehabilitation, and parole is detention. There should be a 

15 big difference. 

16 But I can tell you from what I've observed in the 

17 years I've spent, I don't see much difference between Preston, 

18 Nelles, and Tracy as I did in Folsom and' San Quentin, other than 

19 the age limit. 

20 The recidivism is very high. It's so high, you 

21 don't want to even talk about it. 

22 What goes on those prisons, they should let 
everybody out of there, some of the things that go on in there. 

24 You know, it's troubling to see it. In Pelican Bay, I've seen a 

25 lot of those things. 

26 What I'm saying, there's a lot of things that's 

27 laid on you that shouldn't be laid on you. And I respect you, 

28 and I know about your record. And I knew you when you were in 



17 



the Sheriff's Department with Sherman Block. 

You say we've got beds, you can't fill them. 
Senator Knight was talking about vacancies, we can't fill them. 

We know why you can't fill them. Nobody wants to 
go to jail. The people in and the people going to work there, 
many times, based on what they see in jail, it's kind of 
dangerous in jail. Especially, and you see what happened at 
Pelican Bay, it's dangerous in there. 

I don't know what we can do. I know the Senator 
mentioned the budget. But in this situation where I'm sitting, 
it's very frustrating in knowing. And if you don't know, 
sometimes you're better off to know that you don't know. 

I've seen many times where young kids were put in 
isolation -- we used to call it in XY Unit -- because they did 
have mental problems. You know, they didn't get treatment. 
They got isolation. And they got drugged. It's kind of a sad 
commentary. 

But I respect you, and I think you've done -- I 
started to say you're a credit to your race, but that's supposed 
to be my line. 

[Laughter . 

SENATOR VINCENT: Sir, I think you've got a real 
tough job, and you have my support in any way, if I can help you 
in any way to make it a better situation for the inmates. 

MR. HARPER: Thank you, and I will plan on taking 
advantage of that. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Senator Vincent. 

Do you have anybody you'd like to introduce? 






MR. HARPER: I have some staff here from the CYA 
that I'd like to just stand up so I can introduce them. And 
then, after they sit down, I'll have a couple of them stand up. 

4 Would the staff from CYA Stand up, those of you 

5 who are here. 

6 SENATOR KNIGHT: I thought you said you had 
vacancies . 

8 [Laughter.] 

9 MR. HARPER: Thank you. 
10 In addition, there are two people I'd like to 

introduce. Richard Kai, would you please stand up. He's 
relatively new as my Chief Deputy, and he's doing a great job. 

13 Many years in state service, and he's a big help. 

14 And Senator, one of the things that you talked 
about, I think that we need to give some credit to the fact that 

16 for some eleven years, the Youth Authority had been under the 
strictures of a lawsuit called Nick Owe, which had to do with 
special education, and the fact that we were not providing 
19 special education to some of our wards as we should. There's 
2C one lady here who I think can take maybe not one hundred percent 

21 of the credit for it, but one heck of a lot of credit. Her name 

22 is Doreen Davis. She's a Deputy Director and the Superintendent 

23 of Instruction. I'd like her to stand up, please. 

24 This one lady has basically taken the education 

25 branch and shaken it and made it what it is today. And I think 

26 it is better than it has ever been in the CYA, and it's going tc 
even get better. So, I just wanted to pay a special tribute to 

28 her because I think she's done a tremendous job. 






19 



SENATOR KNIGHT: Do we have anybody in support? 
Senator Polanco, you're late. 

SENATOR POLANCO: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I was 
conducting a subcommittee hearing on budget. 

I'm here to support the nominee that's before 
you, Mr. Harper. I've known him for several years now. I've 
known him in his capacity when he was with the department in the 
county I represent, the Sheriff's Department. 

He brings the kind of leadership that ' s necessary 
in the Youth Authority. He has the courage to bring the kinds 
of changes and innovations that will make a difference in an 
institution that we know has problems. 

His leadership is welcome. His foresight, and 
the firmness, and just the quality of the person, and the 
experience of the person that he is, certainly, I would ask that 
you support and confirm and move forward his nomination. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Senator. 

Anybody else in support? 

Give your name and organization, please. 

MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman and Members, Steve 
White, Inspector General. 

I appear before you in support of Mr. Harper's 
confirmation as Director of the CYA, and I come not as an 
uncritical observer, but as somebody who's been very focused on 
the Department that Mr. Harper leads, and somebody who has been 
pushing, and pushing, and pushing with respect to illuminating 
the kinds of problems that he's confronted with. 

I would like to just say that when I appeared 



20 






before the Committee not too long ago, May of last year, 
2 relative to the problems that Jerry inherited, I spoke at some 

length about the woeful lack of leadership. And Jerry provides 
4 the leadership. 

I think that the biggest hurdle that he had — hi 
may see it differently -- but looking at it from the outside, 
I'm telling you from my perspective, the biggest hurdle that he 
had was understanding the dimension and scope and seriousness o 
9 the problem, because it was almost unplumbable. It is a 
serious, seriously beset, historically harmed department, 
frankly, and that needed the kind of leadership that Jerry is 

12 giving it. 

13 I think he has done a remarkable job under very 
adverse circumstances. He has the need to -- and he's been 

15 stepping up to this need -- the need to change the culture 

16 inside that Department. And he has taken significant steps to 

17 accomplish that. 

18 So, I'm very pleased to support his 

19 confirmation. I don't want, as I conclude my remarks here, to 

20 have anybody think -- and I know Jerry isn't going to believe 
this -- but anybody saying that this is going to be a short 
course. This is a long, hard process. It is going to require 

23 increases in resources such as the Governor has put in the 

budget this year, but it's also going to require significant 

25 management changes at all levels of the Department. 

26 And finally and most important of all, and this 
is the area that I think the leadership so critical, it's goinc 

28 to require a change in the culture. It's going to require 



21 



people resubscribing to the commitment that got them into the 
CYA to start with as staff, and that is the commitment to really 
turn these kids around. For too long, too many have not cared 
about that commitment. 

And Jerry will lead and help those who care to be 
heard, and to help him lead that Department. 

So, that's where I am on that subject. I think 
he's a good Director. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Anybody else wishing to testify in support? 

MR. MABRY: Mr. Chairman and Rules Committee 
Members, Roy Mabry, Association of Black Correctional Workers. 

It's obvious that Mr. Harper didn't inherit a 
Sunday school. With some of the things that we talked about 
today, it's been existing in the Department for quite a while. 

But through our meetings and tours in the Youth 
Authority, and talking to Mr. Harper, and identifying all the 
concerns that a lot of you brought out, and the approach that 
he's taken to address those concerns, we've been giving him 100 
percent of our support in efforts of confirmation. 

And to Director Harper I'd like to say, 
congratulations, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: He's not confirmed yet. Thank 
you for your testimony. 

MR. HARPER: I just want to say that his transfer 
from CDC to CYA is imminent. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. MABRY: I'll be willing to accept a manager's 



22 



1 appointment. 

2 [Laughter . ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. No more politicking 
4 at the table. 

Anybody else? 
6 SENATOR VINCENT: Mr. Chairman, maybe now I can 

put in my word. He's really a credit to his race. 

[Laughter. ] 
9 SENATOR KNIGHT: I knew you'd get it in sooner or 

10 later. 

11 MR. ADAME: Good afternoon. 

12 SENATOR KNIGHT: A lot has been said, so let's 

13 not repeat it. 

14 MR. ADAME: No, sir. 

15 My name is Louie Adame, and I am the State Vice 
President of the California Correctional Peace Officers 
Association, representing all Unit 6 peace officers employed by 

18 the California Department of Youth Authority. 

19 In the past, the media has portrayed and accused 

20 Youth Authority staff of violating the rights of wards and 

21 denying them treatment. Some members of the Legislature and the 

22 public at large have questioned our professionalism. 

23 Let there be no doubt, Unit 6 staff are dedicated 

24 and committed to advancing the mission of the CYA. We believe, 
however, that the CYA needs to address the following issues in 

26 order to move forward. 

27 We need to have adequate staffing levels to do 
our job and do it well. In 1992, CYA significantly reduced the 



23 



number of youth correctional and counselor positions because the 
state was experiencing a fiscal crisis. Years have passed, and 
these positions have never returned, in spite of the overall 
increase in mandated programs pertaining to the treatment needs 
of the wards. In the process, the Youth Authority has gone from 
one of the best in the nation to one of the worst in terms of 
services and treatment provided to juvenile wards. 

It is critical that these positions be restored 
to ensure the mission of the Youth Authority can be effectively 
achieved in a safe and secure environment. 

Two, training and equipment. Unit 6 staff needs 
training, additional training to deal with the increasingly 
explosive juvenile behavior that threatens security within our 
institutions. The latest technology and equipment for 
controlling routine disturbances are desperately needed. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Excuse me. We're here to 
support Mr. Harper? 

MR. ADAME: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: These are problems that he's 
probably going to work on. 

MR. ADAME: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: We're not doing legislation 
here . 

MR. ADAME: I know. I just want it on record. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: On record what? That you want 
these things done? 

MR. ADAME: No. We have discussed this with the 
Director. 



24 



SENATOR KNIGHT: Okay, then you can put it in the 
record and give it to the secretary to include in the record, if 
you would, please. 

MR. ADAME: Then in conclusion, Mr. Harper has 
the task of leading the Youth Authority on the road to recovery 
in delivering service to wards and ensuring staff safety. 

In conclusion, and with the consensus of all 14 
CPOA CYA Chapter representatives, it is my pleasure to announce 
CCPOA's support for Jerry Harper as Director of the California 
Youth Authority. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you very much. 

Next. 

A lot has been said so far in support, and don't 
repeat it. 

MR. RIOS: I will try not to. 

My name is Richard Rios. I am the Vice Chair of 
Bargaining Unit 3. 

And Chairman sort of blew most of my speech when 
he talked about the problems that we're having in the Youth 
Authority. The five atta-boys, the four problems; that was 
mine. I'll go over the atta-boys. I don't think you've heard 
of the atta-boys yet. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, five is enough. 

MR. RIOS: We commend Mr. Harper for his genuine 
commitment to deliver educational services to all Youth 
Authority wards; his willingness to meet and openly discuss all 
work site issues with CSEA representatives; his recognition of 
the serious recruitment problems for some CSEA work 



25 



classifications, particularly those in the teacher and nurse 
classifications. We commend his commitment to aggressively seek 
more competitive compensation for those work classifications in 
which problems of recruitment and retention exist. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Sir, you have submitted your 



letter? 



MR. RIOS: Yes. 
SENATOR KNIGHT: 
MR. RIOS: Yes. 
SENATOR KNIGHT: 



It's in the file? 



If you could, skip to the last 



part and say you support Mr. Harper. 

MR. RIOS: Now, I am a Youth Authority teacher. 
And as I work in the Youth Authority, I get to see a lot of 
things, and I have seen a lot of things for the last 26 years. 
I would hope for a little bit more than two or three seconds to 
deliver my message. I understand -- 

SENATOR KARNETTE: The point is, there is another 
committee you need to talk to. I'll tell you which one it is. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: This is primarily for 
confirmation of Mr. Harper. 

MR. RIOS: And even though we do have some 
serious concerns with regard to his confirmation, we do support 
his confirmation as Director of Youth Authority. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you very much. I wasn't 
meaning to cut you off. 

MR. RIOS: Sir, that's what it felt like, but I 
know there are other people. Thank you very much. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Then I apologize for it. 



26 



1 Next. 

2 MR. GALINDO: Honorable Chair and Committee 
Members, my name is Raul Galindo, and I'm the Vice Chair of the 

4 Youthful Offender Parole Board. 

I've known Jerry for well over 20 years. He was 
a lieutenant on the Sheriff's Department at the time, and I 
worked L.A.P.D. One of the things in talking with the people 
that he supervised was, what a leader. And I can tell you 
unequivocally that you hear that by people that I work with 
everyday in various institutions throughout the state. 
11 He is well known -- and he's probably getting a 

little embarrassed -- for his hard work. You will not see 
another person work as hard as this gentleman does. If there's 

14 26 hours in the day, he's working 26 hours. 

15 I can say this about the Governor. He truly 

16 showed how wise he is in appointing this man for the 

17 directorship. 

18 SENATOR KNIGHT: I assume you support his 

19 nomination. 

20 MR. GALINDO: Yes, and I look forward to working 

21 with him, and I urge his confirmation. 

22 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

23 Anybody else? 

24 Do we have anybody in opposition? 

25 SENATOR KARNETTE: Move the confirmation. 

26 SENATOR KNIGHT: Moved by Senator Karnette. 

27 Secretary, call the roll. 

28 SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 



27 



SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Vincent Aye. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Leave the roll open for Senator 



Burton. 



Congratulations, Mr. Harper. 

MR. HARPER: Thank you very much. I appreciate 
it. Thank you. 

[Thereafter, CHAIRMAN BURTON 
added his Aye vote, making the 
final vote 4-0 for confirmation.] 
SENATOR KNIGHT: Next item is Senator Michael 
Flores, member of the Fish and Game Commission. 

MR. FLORES: Senator, I appreciate that 



promotion 



Senator? 



SENATOR KNIGHT 



I'm sorry. Did I call you a 



MR. FLORES: Yes. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, it's revoked. 
[Laughter . ] 

MR. FLORES: Mr. Chairman and Members, thank you 
today for This opportunity. I am honored to have been appointed 
by Governor Davis as Commissioner on the California Fish and 
Game Commission. I am also honored to speak before this 
distinguished panel. 



28 



Let me begin by sharing with all of you my first 
2 outdoor experience at camp which led me to become the 

outdoorsman that I am today. 
•; I was chosen to go to an outdoors camp the summe: 

after my fourth grade. At camp, I hiked, caught my first fish, 
6 played a round of Capture the Flag. While there, I was exposed 

to a world that I had not previously known. 

8 SENATOR KNIGHT: You're going to skip from there 

9 pretty high in your age limit, aren't you? 

10 MR. FLORES: Yes. 

11 [Laughter. ] 

12 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

13 MR. FLORES: Through these experiences, I learne 

14 a lot about comradery, resourcefulness, and I discovered a love 
and respect for nature. To this day, these experiences are as 

16 sharp in my mind as the day they occurred, and they continue to 
inspire my desire to protect the natural environment for future 

18 generations to come. 

19 I consider myself extremely fortunate to have ha 
both this first experience at camp, as well as an older brother 

21 who helped me cultivate the outdoors. 

22 But because I know how wonderful it can be for 
any kid to experience the outdoors, as a Commissioner I want tc 

24 expand the opportunities for our youth to understand and 

25 appreciate this beautiful state. 

26 I feel that the Commission, along with private 

27 partners, could accomplish this goal. The natural wilderness c 

28 this state is a beautiful resource and should be available for 



29 



all Californians to experience. Yet, there are many adults and 
youngsters who have never taken a step into the forest, walked 
along a stream, or let alone seen a wild animal in its natural 
environment . 

As Commissioner, I will make outreach programs to 
the inner-city and low-income youth one of my highest 
priorities . 

I also believe that all people should be made 
stakeholders in the stewardship of our wilderness habitat: 
conservationists, commercial fishermen, animal rights advocates, 
hunters, and all others with an interest in the outdoor 
activities should be encouraged to participate in Commission 
hearings . 

For this reason, during the past year I have put 
special emphasis on including as many different constituent 
groups as possible in our hearings. I am proud to say that the 
Commission has begun to have weekend hearings. This past 
February in Sacramento was our first weekend meeting, the first 
time in the Commission's history. As expected, the Commission 
meeting had a much higher turnout than expected. 

But I feel that a major challenge for all of us 
as stewards of our outdoors is to protect against the loss of 
natural habitat. Protection of the environment, as well as 
protection of all natural species found within our outdoors 
should be our highest priority. 

Finally, my goal to be able to leave to my 
children and all the children of this state a more pristine and 
bountiful wilderness, much more than I found on my trip to camp 



30 



many summers ago. 

Mr. Chairman and Members, thank you very much. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Flores. 

Any questions, Senator Karnette? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I was just wondering how 
you're going to try to make the wilderness -- I would like to 
see more wilderness. Do you have any plans for that, and taking 
care of the wildlife? Because the title of the Commission is 
Fish and Game, but I think people have talked about making it 
wildlife, which I think would be an interesting approach. 

MR. FLORES: Well, the goal of the Commission is 
to provide and set guidelines policy for the Department of Fish 
and Game. It's to -- 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I guess you could say game is 
wildlife . 

MR. FLORES: Well, it is. 

One of the responsibilities of the Commission is 
to set the guidelines and also the harvesting for the taking of 
game in the wild. 

A lot of people feel that, well, the taking of 
game is used as a management tool in order to manage the 
particular game species, such as turkey, elk, deer, and various 
other wild game. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Also, the fish population is 
decreasing. I know I represent Southern California and the 
coastline, Long Beach. 

What is one of the big problems with the over 
fishing? 



31 



1 MR. FLORES: Well, one of the measures that we 

2 recently took was to, in terms of the harvesting of near shore 

3 fisheries, which is the responsibility of the Commission, was to 

4 set some emergency guidelines in place. 

5 The science is not quite exact in terms of -- it 

6 looks as though that the near shore fisheries, in particular 

7 there's about three or four different species that are -- their 

8 stocks are very depleted. One is due to commercial fishing; 

9 the other is due to sport fishermen take. 

10 What we've done is, we've enacted some very 

11 conservative guidelines in terms of the allocation for harvest 

12 this year. We're looking at to further identify what the impact 

13 is overall. And I think that down the road, we'll take 

14 appropriate action if we can. 

15 If it looks as though the allocation, or the 

16 numbers are actually much higher, the stocks are much higher 

17 than originally anticipated, then I think the Commission would 

18 be more favorable to make the allocations larger. 

19 But I think in this instance, I've advocated to 

20 take a much more conservative approach. And I feel that we 

21 don't need to go the route of the abalone, which in some cases 

22 are extinct. I'd much rather undo something later on, as 

23 opposed to not being upfront and proactive, and then later 

24 finding out that we waited too late. 

2 5 SENATOR KARNETTE: Do we have enough game 

26 wardens, do you think? 

27 MR. FLORES: No, well, that's a decision for the 

28 Director of the Department of Fish and Game to make and 



32 



determine. But from what I've seen, I don't believe so. 

2 If you take on average, a game warden has about 

600 square miles to patrol. No city officer, no Highway 

4 Patrolman in his right mind would want that kind of 

5 responsibility. 

6 So, I think that certainly there is room for more 
wardens. There's a whole host of issues along with that, and 
I'm sure that Director Hight would be more than happy to sit 

9 down and talk with you about that. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: One more, and then I'm 

11 finished. 

12 SENATOR KNIGHT: I hope so. 

13 [Laughter . ] 

14 SENATOR KARNETTE: I tell you, I commend him. He 

15 learns fast. 

16 The endangered species, what do you see the role 

17 of the Commission in the endangered species and how we protect 

18 them? 

19 MR. FLORES: Well, I think that as I stated 

20 earlier in my statement, I think that we're here to help nurture 

21 along those species that are in dire need of it. One of them -- 

22 for instance, we've listed this last year a couple of plants. 

23 We also are getting ready to probably list the Coho Salmon, who 

24 is in dire, dire straits at this point. 

25 So, I see the roll of the Commission to identify 

26 those species and see if there is a negative impact, and to 

27 list, go ahead and list. 

28 It depends on what the science is. Most of our 



33 



1 policy's based on science and what the Department prepares for 

2 us. 

3 But we as Commissioners I don't think necessarily 

4 solely rely on that. We have to ask some very hard questions 

5 and do a lot of homework. 

6 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

7 Senator Vincent. 

8 SENATOR VINCENT: I think we'd better have a full 

9 Committee here, because I'm going to have trouble with this 

10 confirmation. 

11 The reason I'm going to have trouble with it is 

12 the fact that Mr. Flores indicates that he likes to get kids out 

13 in the wilderness and see the animals. Well, I hope he wouldn't 

14 take them out there to kill them when they see them. 

15 MR. FLORES: No. 

16 SENATOR VINCENT: Number two, I have a love for 

17 animals, more so than most people, in particular horses. I've 

18 got horses; I've got cats; I've got dogs. 

19 And we had a committee hearing moments ago about 

20 the Armenian situation and Turkey situation, and the terms 

21 genocide and massacre was used. I've seen a massacre of horses. 

22 I've seen them do that in Arizona, you know, wild horse group. 

23 I'm not denying you a right to do what you want 

24 to do. I just find it very difficult to support that. I find 

25 it very difficult to support that. 

26 SENATOR KNIGHT: To support what? 

27 SENATOR VINCENT: I said, I find it very 

28 difficult to support his situation for the job he's doing based 



34 



on what his hobby is, and that's hunting, in particular bow 
hunting. I find a problem dealing with that. 

So, I think you'd better get the full Committee 
back if you want to vote on this, because I don't plan on voting 
for it. 

MR. FLORES: Would you like me to address some of 
those for you, Senator? 

SENATOR VINCENT: Fine, sir. 

MR. FLORES: First of all, my goal to get our 
inner-city youth in the outdoors is not to manufacture hunters. 
My goal is to give them an alternative to the urban corridors 
that we all live in. 

Like I said earlier, if it wasn't for an 
elementary school principal who saw something in me, and was 
able to send me to camp, I probably would not be sitting here 
before you, not as a hunter, but as Secretary of Foreign 
Affairs, a position that I hold currently, or as nominee as 
Commissioner. 

I just think that the outdoors provides an 
alternative to the jungles that we live in on a daily basis. 

I'm not in the business of manufacturing hunters. 
That's not my goal. 

My goal is to give kids the opportunities to go 
to the outdoors. 

I heard an interesting story today about a kid 
who was able to go to the outdoors. And he went on a camping 
trip. He was a kid from Los Angeles, I believe. And when it 
was all over, said, and done, he told one of the camp 



35 



1 counselors, "I want to come back in the winter time." 

2 And the camp counselor said, "Well, why?" 

3 He said, "Because I want to see the Christmas trees 

4 with their lights on it." 

5 Well, that's a cute little story, but it's sad. 

6 It's a sad statement that his only exposure to the outdoors is a 
7' Christmas tree in the winter time in his home. 

8 So, my goal is to get kids out so they can learn 

9 a little bit about what it's like to hike. It's there for us. 

10 It's not mine. It's not anybody's in particular. It's 

11 theirs. And what better way? 

12 And if it keeps a kid on the straight and narrow, 

13 then I'm all for it. And if it saves only one kid from getting 

14 out of potential gangs, or whatever the case may be, I think 

15 it ' s a worthwhile opportunity that the government and private 

16 partnerships ought to get together and get some of these kids 

17 out of these jungles, and get them out in the outdoors so they 

18 can see what it's like. That's what I'm about. 

19 SENATOR VINCENT: I agree with you completely 

20 about getting kids in the outdoors, and kids seeing Christmas 

21 trees during the winter months. 

22 : But I don't agree with the fact that -- and 

23 that's my own personal thing -- that kids should go out in the 

24 wilderness to -- not that you're training them to do it, but you 

25 say, get them seeing the habitats, seeing wild animals. 

26 I know that if the information I have is correct, 

27 the organizations you belong to, I think they're dealing with 

28 hunting. 



36 



MR. FLORES: Well, they are, but they're 
conservation organizations. You take a look at California Water 
Fowl Association as one. If it weren't for many of the 
contributions that duck hunters make, we wouldn't have any 
wetlands habitat. The Sierra Club has stated that in some 
fliers that they passed out. Our wetlands are down to 50 
percent -- well, they're actually down 90 percent. 

SENATOR VINCENT: I don't really buy that. Let 
me tell you why I don't buy that. 

You know, in Africa, I went to the Serengeti. 
They've got wild animals there. You know, nature takes care of 
itself. It really does. There's nobody in the Serengeti 
shooting rifles or anything like that, or machine guns. That's 
not happening. 

MR. FLORES: Well, with all due respect, Senator, 
there is nobody developing on the Serengeti, like developers 
develop in this state. 

SENATOR VINCENT: What I'm saying to you, you 
belong to hunting organizations; is that correct? 

MR. FLORES: I belong to what I consider 
conservation organizations. 

SENATOR VINCENT: Well, I consider it hunting. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Are you indicating that you're 
absolutely against hunting? Is that it? 

SENATOR VINCENT: No, no, I'm not absolutely 
against anything. 

But I'm not voting for it. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Okay, that's fine. 



37 



SENATOR VINCENT: You can do what you want to do. 
I'm going to do what I want to do. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Do we have people in support? 

SENATOR POLANCO: Mr. Chairman and Members, I'm 
not a hunter, for the record. And this is an entity that deals 
with a variety of issues, from wildlife to habitat. The area 
that they have jurisdiction over belongs to all of us. And 
there is nothing in today's statute that says hunting is 
prohibited. In fact, we regulate it in order to protect. 

Again, I am not one who does hunting, but I have 
known Mr. Flores for sometime. I believe he's sincere when he 
talks about outreaching. I believe he's sincere when he talks 
about bringing inner-urban kids to a setting that they will 
probably never be exposed to. I believe that he brings them 
there not to manufacture hunters when he says that he does. And 
I believe that the proactiveness of engaging kids in 
environments that, for all intent and purpose, they may not 
ever, ever experience does have a profound impact on the life of 
these young individuals. 

So, I'm here to ask that you look at his record. 
I would feel very comfortable knowing that he is there, because 
I know him. I believe what he says is true when he talks about 
what he's talked about. 

And although this is a very peculiar area for me 
to engage in because of my history, I believe what he says. And 
when he says what he says, I believe that is what is truth. 

So, he brings the kind of experience and know-how 
to a commission that needs the kind of balance that I know he 



38 



will bring. And so, I would ask for your favorable 
consideration. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Senator Polanco. 

Next witness. 

MR. McCAULL: Thank you, Senators. My name is 
John McCaull. I'm the State Legislative Director for the 
National Audubon Society. 

We're not a hunting organization. Our roots go 
back a hundred years to the preservation of birds, and wildlife, 
and habitat. 

We strongly support Mr. Flores for this 
confirmation. Having met with him and talked with him, there 
are two things that I just want to stress. 

One is that for the future of California's 
natural environment, we have to look not only at the people who 
live in rural communities but the urban areas of the state. 
That's where most of the voters are; that's where most of the 
people are. 

And where there's an experience in a city park, 
or an opportunity to go into the Sierras or the coast, those can 
be a life-changing experience. And I really believe that 
Mr. Flores is going to encourage that and bring a new openness 
to the Commission and perhaps a new role in educating people 
about the importance of wildlife and the environment. 

And secondly, our group, again, not really taking 
positions on hunting issues, we're more focused on preservation 
of populations of species that are threatened or endangered, 
the Commission's role in that. And I think if we can step 



39 






1 outside of -- the greatest threat to wildlife in California is 

2 not from hunting. It's from loss of habitat for all kinds of 

3 reasons. And I think the Commission has done a good job with 

4 Mr. Flores on it, looking at those issues. 

5 I would urge your aye vote. Thank you. 

6 SENATOR KNIGHT: Next witness. 

7 Let's not continue to repeat. We got the picture 

8 MR. KELLOGG: I'm not going to, Mr. Chairman. 

9 I've been here before, and thought that Senator Burton was real 

10 clear about short speeches, but I see where you're making it 

11 maybe even more clear. 

12 My name is Jim Kellogg, and I'm here representing 

13 the 350,000 men and women of the State Building and Construction 

14 Trades Council in the State of California, who, over 75 percent 

15 of purchase hunting and fishing licenses, knowing that that 

16 purchase goes to the conservation and control of animal 

17 | habitat. 

18 We're here to support the confirmation of Michael 

19 Flores. 

20 I'm also here with another hat, which is the 

21 Northern California Outdoor Sportman ' s Coalition. We're here to 

22 support the confirmation of Michael Flores as well. 

23 Many in both organizations are in the audience 

24 today. 

25 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

26 Next witness. 

27 MR. RYAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and 

28 distinguished Senators. My name is Charles Ryan. I'm the 



40 



senior staff person for the National Wild Turkey Federation. 
We are the second largest conservation, single species 
conservation organization in American, with over 300,000 
members . 

I just wanted to make a couple of different 
points. We're certainly in favor of Michael Flores. 

But hunting has taken place for 500,000 years. 
Every person in this room owes their existence to hunting and 
all of the many social aspects that have been incorporated into 
everything we do: organization, language, communication. It's 
a part of our heritage. 

It's recognized by all 50 of the State 
Legislatures, the federal government has a legitimate management 
activity. 

And there will be opposition, and there are 
groups, well-meaning groups and concerned people in our society 
that, in the generations -- just a couple of generations of 
grocery stores, have forgotten that other living things have to 
die for us to exist. We have replaced hunting largely by going 
to the grocery store and paying people to do our killing for 
us. But things have to die for us to exist. That's nature. 
Everything out in nature is eating something else, and we're 
part of it. 

I don't think we can isolate hunting and depict 
it as an evil when most of the conservation effort in America 
and throughout the world today is being funded by hunters. 

Thank you so much. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 



41 



1 Next witness. 

2 DR. OATES: Jim Gates, Sacramento dentist. 

3 Mike Flores and I have been friends for ten 

4 years, and I wholeheartedly support his confirmation on the 

5 Commission. 

6 He is a biologically sound manager of fish and 
wildlife. He will look at the issues that will allow us to have 

8 an abundance of game and fish in our rivers and in our 

9 environment for the future generations, for our children and our 

10 grandchildren. That's why I support him. 

11 Thank you. 

12 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

13 Next witness. 

14 MR. HENNELLY: Hi. Mark Hennelly, California 

15 Waterfowl Association. 

16 I'd first like to echo Mr. Ryan's comments 

17 earlier. 

18 SENATOR KNIGHT: And everybody else's, I assume. 

19 MR. HENNELLY: Indeed. 

20 Our Association strongly supports the 

21 confirmation of Mr. Flores to the Fish and Game Commission. As 

22 an avid outdoorsman and wildlife enthusiast, Mike Flores not 

23 only has an excellent understanding of California's natural 

24 resource issues, but also brings and important perspective to 

25 the Commission how their regulations affect the public. 

26 Furthermore, more Mr. Flores' commitment to 

27 institute weekend meetings that we heard about earlier of the 

28 Commission will ensure that all interests have the opportunity 



42 



to provide input to the Commission and have their voices heard. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Next witness. 

MS. ERICKSON: Hello. My name's Jennifer 
Erickson. I am a representative of the National Wild Turkey 
Federation. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Turkey Federation. 

MS. ERICKSON: Yes. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I thought we just had one. 

MS. ERICKSON: Actually, I represent the women in 
the outdoors program. From personal experience, I know how 
important outdoor education is, both for women and children, and 
all adults any more. 

And I would just like to say that we support 
Michael Flores. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you very much. 

Next. 

MR. GEYER: I'm Bill Geyer. I'm Executive 
Director of the Resource Landowners Coalition. It's an 
organization which deals with the Commission primarily in the 
endangered species and habitat area. 

I have to say that I've known Mr. Flores for 
sometime. I think he's shown an excellent record on the Fish 
and Game Commission so far, and we urge you to confirm him so we 
can keep working with him. 

And I really — we want to work with him on his 
particular initiative relative to getting people from the cities 



43 



1 out in the country. 

2 SENATOR KNIGHT: I got the picture. Thank you. 

3 MR. HOUSTON: I'm Bob Houston, representing the 

4 East Bay Regional Park District. 

5 I had the opportunity to be in the wildlife with 

6 Mr. Flores and have first-hand knowledge of his interest and 

7 dedication towards the wildlife. 

8 Thank you. 

9 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

10 Next. 

11 MR. ALLAYAUD: Bill Allayaud for Sierra Club 

12 California. And we're pleased to support Mr. Flores. 

13 In particular, what resonated with us is his 

14 support of the youth getting out. We have a Youth in Wilderness 

15 Program that works in urban areas. We feel like that's 

16 important. 

17 We also feel like Mr. Flores gets it when it 

18 comes to preserving habitat as the most important thing. 

19 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

20 Anybody in opposition? 

21 You all are under the same ground rules. 

22 MR. MILLS: Senator Knight, Members of the 

23 Committee, my name is Eric Mills, Coordinator of Action for 

24 Animals in Oakland. 

25 Mr. Flores is a great guy. I like him, and he's 

26 highly qualified, but not for this job in my view. 

27 I commend a report to your circumspection here, 

28 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife 



44 



Federation, put out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: 93 
2 percent of the hunters in this state are male; 97 percent are 

white; only two percent of Californians hunt. 
4 This Commission in its mission statement says 

that they are to represent all the people in California. This 
6 is not being done. I liked your woman recommendation. Wouldn't 

it be nice to see a woman on this Commission sometime before I 

8 die? 

9 There have been two vacancies for over a year 
10 since the Governor's been lax in his appointments. Mr. Flores 

did not apply for this job. I know three qualified people who 

12 did. There were lots of support letters, and we haven't gotten 

13 the time of day. 

14 The truth is, sportsmen alone cannot financially 

15 support the Fish and Game. There's a great shortage of wardens 

16 right now. They make about three-quarters of the pay of 

17 policeman. They get shot a lot. 

18 One of my warden friends told me I could forget 

19 calling CalTIP any more with all the infractions I've seen in 

20 the cities' live animal markets throughout the state because 

21 there is no manpower to enforce this. 

22 SENATOR KNIGHT: Are you suggesting that hunting 

23 be outlawed? 

24 MR. MILLS: No, sir. If you kill something to 

25 eat it, that's fine. 

2 6 But Senator Karnette, I might point out that game 

27 does mean animals that you shoot and kill. 

28 SENATOR KARNETTE: I know, but I think that word 



45 



came about before -- you know, this is an old word. I think 
they used it in Shakespearean times. 

MR. MILLS: That's before my time. 

I'm a little concerned that Mr. Flores might not 
have time to commit to this. He's going to keep his job as the 
Director of Protocol for Governor. 

MR. FLORES: Secretary of Foreign Affairs. 

MR. MILLS: Secretary of Foreign Affairs. He's 
going to be a little busy. I understand that the Mexican 
President is here. 

I know I was at the meeting on Friday of last 
month in Sacramento. Neither Mr. Flores nor Mr. Richard 
Thieriot were present. We couldn't get a quorum. We've got two 
vacancies for over a year. I don't understand this 
foot-dragging by the Gov. We've got to do better. 

Opposition to Mr. Flores is running about 
two-to-one. Almost all of his support is from co-hunting 
groups. He's a member of a lot of hunting organizations, but 
bow hunting I find the most problem with: 50 percent crippling 
loss with bow hunting in this country in every study I've seen. 

I was taken with seeing the Wild Turkey folks 
here. That is a non-native species. So is the striped bass. 
So is the ring-necked pheasant and the chucker partridge. 

We're spending millions of dollars in this state 
on exotic species when, two years ago, this same Commission had 
over 2,000 letters in support of a ban on frogs and turtles 
being imported to live animal markets in Sacramento, San 
Francisco, Oakland; 2,000 letters. Routine for the status quo, 



46 



and nothing was done there. They abdicated their 
responsibility. I'm concerned about that. 

Mr. Flores has said he'd be willing once again to 
have some hearings maybe on this. Let's hope. 

I think that's pretty much it. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, thank you, then. 

MR. MILLS: Yes, sir. But, with all due respect, 
I think he's a good man, but not the best man for the job. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I think I got your word. 

Next witness. 

MR. BERGER: Good afternoon. My name's Alan 
Berger. I'm the Executive Director of the Animal Protection 
Institute. We're a national nonprofit animal advocacy group 
with about 20,000 members in California. 

I will agree with some of Eric's comments. I met 
personally with Michael Flores a few weeks ago and would agree, 
and I think probably everyone that comes up here will. He's 
competent, personable, a very effective person. But again, I 
will agree with Eric, could serve ably on many state 
commissions, but not on this one. 

The role of the Fish and Game Commission has 
changed dramatically over the years. There have been many laws 
enacted by the state that have gone toward the conservation and 
environment. So today, the Commission really has a dual role. 
What's happening is, the residents of California are much more 
supporting the second part of that, and that is the conservation 
of wildlife rather than the hunting and consumptive use. 

The figure that was used, and it's actually a 



47 



1 little bit lower, there are only approximately 320,000 hunting 

2 licenses. About one percent of the population in California 

3 actually hunts. The national average is 5.9 percent. Both of 

4 those percentages have been dropping dramatically over the last 

5 25 years. 

6 I could probably cite three different polls that 

7 we've been involved in that will show that the residents of 

8 California do not even support sport hunting at about a 60 

9 percent rate. You've had ballot initiatives in this particular 

10 state that have dealt with mountain lions, that have dealt with 

11 trapping, restricting trapping, and banning certain poisons. 

12 They were -- they both won by large amounts. 

13 The gist here is that this group that's opposing 

14 Mr. Flores is really representing the voters of California 

15 today. The balance on the Commission has not represented those 

16 voters. 

17 SENATOR KNIGHT: Question. 

18 MR. BERGER: My own opposition is really that 

19 this Commission should be balanced to support the voters. 

20 SENATOR KNIGHT: Question. 

21 So, you're telling me that because you are a 

22 large organization and a large group, that that minority group 

23 that hunts should be excluded from doing anything in California, 

24 and considering that it is a lawful endeavor? 

25 MR. BERGER: What I have said is that the 
Commission does not have balance. The Commission is balanced 

< towards that hunting group, which really represents the minority 

28 of residents. 



48 



All that I'm asking for is that there be more 
balance. And when you're looking at nominating and approving 
someone to be on the Commission, that they should really 
represent the majority of the voters in the state, that are 
really not represented on that Commission today. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Next witness, please. 

MS. HANDLEY: Hello, I'm Virginia Handley with 
the Fund for Animals. 

I attend as many Commission meetings as possible 
that I can, and I have watched the Commission very closely for 
many years. 

Mr. Flores has been on the Commission already for 
one year, so to talk of what all is going to be done in the 
future, we already have a history, and we have not seen these 
promises thus far. 

Under the authorization law in the Fish and Game 
Code that gives the Commission the authority to regulate 
wildlife, they are also obliged by law to consider the welfare 
of the individual animals. We feel this is a very important 
obligation, and we really do not feel that that obligation is 
being met. 

At the last time that I was at a confirmation 
hearing, this Committee confirmed Richard Thieriot, at the same 
time it was found that he had something like 95 violations of 
the Fish and Game Code of illegal ducks. I thought it was 
astounding that one would appoint somebody to a commission who's 
actually in violation of the very laws that they are supposed to 
be in charge of. At least Mr. Flores has not violated any 






49 



1 laws . 

2 But we do see a conflict of interest that should 

3 be thought about under any commission that is actually going to 

4 regulate an activity in which they themselves take part, and 

5 that they themselves will be affected by his own vote. 

6 I know at the last Commission hearing that I 

7 attended there was talk about the archery-only elk hunt that 

8 they want next year. Well, here we have a bow and arrow hunter. 

9 How is he expected to vote on that? I would think it would be a 

10 difficult vote. 

11 We, of course, would be opposed to an archery- 

12 only elk hunt. We are particularly opposed to archery because 

13 of the effects of the wounding on the animals, the very sloppy 

14 kills, or animals that are left to die later. 

15 I was at the Commission meeting when they had a 

16 conference call to finalize last year's hunting regulations. I 

17 did not hear Mr. Flores speak up at that meeting or at any other 

18 meeting that I have attended, except to speak up for bow 

19 hunters, even though we had a number of issues before the 

20 Commission of concern. 

21 Last year, for instance, they were removing the 

22 quota on the bear tags, which means we're going to have 

23 thousands of more hunters out for the bears, which can then mean 

24 that more bears are being killed than you actually want, because 

25 how are you going to reel in all these thousands of hunters to 

26 tell them the quota has been hit. 

27 We have an ongoing problem about trapping. 

28 Animals are still being trapped in box traps. They're still 



50 



1 being beaten to death. 

2 SENATOR KARNETTE: Excuse me. 

Doesn't a person like Mr. Flores have to help in 

this? Isn't the Commission trying to do something? I mean, 

5 it's not all his fault. 

6 MS. HANDLEY: No, that's my point, is that the 
Commission very well could do something about this, but they 
chose not to. Mr. Flores was on that Commission during the 
times that all this was put before him. He chose -- did not 

10 indicate any interest in the issues that we had before them. 

11 The interest that I did hear and see was an 

12 interest in the bow hunters. And there was some concern about 

13 the bow hunters were not allowed in a particular hunt. He 

14 wanted to know why couldn't the bow hunters go in there. 

15 I just didn't see much interest or any reflection 

16 on -- 

17 SENATOR KARNETTE: Did he do anything wrong? I'm 

18 getting a little concerned. 

19 MS. HANDLEY: Yes, because doing nothing, in many 
instances, doing nothing wrong is doing something wrong. 

21 I might also add, for instance, we had -- talking 

22 about children in the outdoors. We've had a year. There's no 
program that the Commission has put forward to get kids into the 

24 outdoors, except one, Junior Hunts. And last year, I think we 

added a couple of more Junior Hunts, which Mr. Flores would have 

26 voted on as part of the package. 

27 We on do not consider Junior Hunting the program 

28 to get the kids into the outdoors. 



51 



We just don't see any record after this year. 
There's been two endangered plants that were voted on. That's 
very good. I don't think they've had to vote on any endangered 
species . 

Concerning the Saturday hearings, we are glad 
that there is trying to get the public more involved. But I'll 
tell you, the public that got more involved -- this was 
ironically set on a Saturday when they were going to discuss the 
hunting regulations. So, you know where we got more input; we 
had more bow hunters showed up. The bow hunters do not need 
representation on the Commission. They're very well represented 
in their participation in all of the hearings and the material 
that they bring. They already do quite a job for themselves. 

We have other issues, too, such as the exotic 
animals that the Fish and Game Commission covers. The 
regulations, those regulations needs to be strengthened. We 
have zero enforcement of those regulations. We've not seen any 
commitment or interest on Mr. Flores ' part to help with that 
issue . 

We have the issue with the live animal markets. 
Maybe we can have an informational hearing. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Do you have a list of the things 
that you would like to submit? 

MS. HANDLEY: I'm just about finished. That's it 
as far as what the issues that we are concerned about, and I did 
put in a position paper. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Okay, then that'll be in the 
record, and we appreciate that. 



52 



1 MS. HANDLEY: May I add one more thing. 

2 There are a number of people that have put their 
names out to be on the Commission. I'm one of them. I do not 
expect any appointment or any confirmation, because I'm 
considered an anti-hunter. 

6 But in the same regard, how is it that it's okay 

to go to other extreme? At least I have no vested interest in 
how Commission comes out. It doesn't affect my life. But yet 
it seems to be okay to -- let's put on a completely aggressive 
hunting advocate who will actually -- can actually profit 

11 personally, not financially, in the outcome of his own vote. 

12 And yet, that should be considered a conflict of interest. 

13 We expect better from this Legislature and better 

14 from this Governor. Thank you. 

15 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you for your testimony. 

16 Next witness, please. 

17 MS. RAASCH: Thank you, Senator Knight and 

18 Members. 

19 I'm Karen Raasch, California Federation for 

20 Animal Legislation. 

21 The main point I would like to make is that the 

22 Commission historically and still is imbalanced. I think 

23 it's -- considering that less than one percent of the 

24 Californians have hunting licenses and hunt, where is the 
representation for the other 99 percent of the citizens who wantj 

26 to see that the animals are well protected? 

27 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

28 Next witness, please. 



53 



MR. WEISS: Yes, my name is Larry Weiss, and I am 
here representing Sonoma People for Animals. I'm an animal 
attorney, and I've practiced animal law for about 25 years now. 

We are opposing Mr. Flores' nomination on the 
ground that it continues to weight the Commission in favor of 
hunters . 

There's nothing personal, Mr. Flores. 

He came to speak to a coalition of animal 
welfarists, and he was very personable. 

But nothing can change the matter and the fact 
that even though hunters are only two percent of our population 
in California, from the time of its inception, the Commission 
has always had a majority of hunters. 

So, I am not anti-hunter as much as I am pro- 
representative government. And Mr. Flores himself said, and we 
heard him say this morning, that all people should be made 
stakeholders of our natural resources. How are we going to do 
that if the vast majority of us are always in the minority? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: You ought to join the Senate 
sometime . 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. WEISS: We have enough politics in the court 
room, thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Next witness. 

MS. LERNBERG: I'm Rose Lernberg, and I'm with 
the Contra Costa Humane Society. 

I agree with all the things that have been said 



54 



before. I find Mr. Flores very likeable personally. I've been 
at two meetings with him. 

I would like to just quickly tell you about a pet 
peeve of mine. I was brought up in the Hudson Valley in New 
York, born on a farm. My father was a hunter, and I had two 
teen-aged brothers who were older than I who were hunters. 

But I never heard them refer to harvesting or 
taking game. I detest those phrases. They're killing animals, 
and this business of harvesting and taking, those words just, to 
me, represent a mind-set. 

I'm sorry, Mr. Flores. I know that you use those 
words, and that has been peeve of mine for the many years that I 
have been listening and reading things that the Fish and Game 
Commission has put out. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: We'll ask him not to use those 
kind of words any more. 

Thank you. 

In the testimony, you know, it's interesting, but 
I would suspect that if we put all of the opposition on the 
board, we'd do away with hunting pretty quickly. 

I come from Michigan and a farm, am very much 
aware of animals, and very much aware of hunting and the results 
of not hunting in Michigan, for example. 

We have to do so something because there are no 
more mountain lions, there are no more bobcats, et cetera, to 
take care of the deer. 

And in years when it's good for the deer, we see 
deer dying of starvation. And you don't want to see that. 






55 



So, hunting in Michigan is pretty well regulated, 
depending on the crop of deer in a year. So, I think hunting is 
good. 

And I would ask for a motion, or I'll make a 
motion that we approve -- what's your name -- 

[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: — Michael Flores' nomination. 

Secretary call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Vincent. 
Senator Burton. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: If you will, leave the roll open 
for Senator Burton. 

MR. FLORES: Senator, if I could, I'd like to 
introduce my family and some of my staff who came here today. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Very good. I forgot that. 

MR. FLORES: Actually, there is a whole lot of 
them. Probably if I just ask them to stand up en mass, as 
opposed to introducing them. 

My wife, my father, my brothers, my sisters, all 
back there. There's my son. 

I think I have some staff here, too. I'd like to 
recognize them as well for their hard work. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Very good. Thank you and 
congratulations, I think. 



56 



MR. FLORES: Thank you very much. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Senator Burton, you've got the 
gavel, and the vote is open. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'll give him a courtesy vote 
for Senator Johnson. 

SECRETARY WEBB: All right, 3-0 on Mr. Flores? 

And on Mr. Harper, do you wish to be added? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: You're confirmed, Mr. Flores. 
Congratulations again. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 

Senate Rules Committee hearing 

was terminated at approximately. 

3:23 P.M. ] 

— ooOoo — 



57 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

j/ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 
~*J(f day of 997^*' <" / Q , 2001. 







A'^ 



~^lu^< 



"*r 



EVELYN J. MIZAK'-^ 
Shorthand Reporter 









421 -R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.25 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 421 -R when ordering. 



1**1 

no . '3 



^HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

SAN FRANC/SCO 
PU BL/C L/BRARy 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

APR I 6 230| 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2001 
1:36 P.M. 



422-R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 



STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 



ROOM 3191 



SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2 001 



1:36 P.M. 



Reported by- 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 

SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 

SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 

SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 

MEMBER ABSENT 

SENATOR ED VINCENT 

STAFF PRESENT 

GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 

TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 

CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 

ALSO PRESENT 

BARRY KEENE, Director 
General Services 

WILLIAM BURKE, Ph.D., Member 
Air Resources Board 

SENATOR NELL SOTO 

CYNTHIA PERALTA-VERDUGO, Member 

South Coast Air Quality Management District Board 



Ill 
INDEX 

Pase 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

BARRY KEENE, Director 

Department of General Services 1 

Background and Mission 1 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

High Cost of Inmate Phone Calls 3 

Cost of Monitoring Prison Phones 4 

Request for Staff to Find Out 

Exactly the Cost of Such Calls 6 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Need for Inmates at CYA to Make 

Phone Calls to Families 7 

Same Contract for All Prisons and CYA 7 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Federal Government's Phone System in 

Prisons 8 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Technology for Monitoring Calls 9 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Bipartisan Support for State Not 

Making Profit on Phones 10 

Status of Ziggeraut Lease 10 

Cost per Square Foot 12 



IV 



Ability to Transfer the Space for 

State Use 13 

Intention to Support Confirmation 14 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Status of Contracts for Disabled 

Veterans Business Enterprises 14 

Motion to Confirm 15 

Committee Action 15 

WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ph.D., Member 

Air Resources Board 16 

Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR NELL SOTO 16 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Lawsuit on State's Implementation Plan 19 

Most Effective Ways for Local Air 

Districts to Ensure Compliance 2 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Elimination of Veto Authority of Air 

Boards on Transfers of Air Credits 21 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

ZEV Mandate 22 

Motion to Confirm 24 

Committee Action 24 

CYNTHIA VERDUGO-PERALTA, Member 

South Coast Air Quality Management District 24 

Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR NELL SOTO 24 



V 



Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Board's Plans on Environmental Justice 25 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Transportation of Ethanol into 

Communities Surrounding Refineries 27 

Motion to Confirm 28 

Committee Action 28 

Termination of Proceedings 28 

Certificate of Reporter 29 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--O0O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Barry Keene. Go ahead, Barry. 
We've got your statement of principal for the record. 

MR. KEENE: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and 
Members. I want to thank the Members and the staff of the 
Committee for helping to provide focus to this confirmation 
hearing. 

I'm Barry Keene. The hearing is for the 
Directorship of General Services. 

Personally, I'm very grateful for this further 
opportunity for public service, and I hope that you'll find me 
gualif ied. 

I must tell you, the room looks a lot larger from 
down here than it used to look from sitting up there. Your 
accustomed room is being repaired by General Services now, a 
victim -- it's not in the nature of a quid pro quo, you 
understand, but I thought I'd mention it in passing. 

The Department of General Services was created in 
the 1950s as the centralized provider of common business 
services to very diverse public agencies, and this was in the 
interest of efficiency. The three main areas were and still are 
real estate, communications, and purchasing commodities. 

The funding was provided mainly through a service 
revolving fund, or to use the now familiar technology, at 
General Services, we buy you a hot dog, and you pay us a dollar. 

Complaints about the initial control ethic at 
General Services caused it to be transformed into more of a 



service culture, and we're still trying to do that. Complaints 
about inefficiencies caused it to have to compete with private 
sector suppliers, and frankly, we welcome that. 

And that brings us to today, where our largest 
problem at General Services is this. Because of the diversity 
of services provided, and they're still growing, including many 
technology-based new ones, it's fragmented to some extent 
delivery, it's reduced coordination, it's diminished some 
accountability to our customers. So, we're addressing this 
directly through a strategy known as 1 DGS, which I can 
elaborate and expand on, if the Committee wishes, at a later 
time this morning. 

On a less theoretical level, we're proudest of 
our technological achievements, our performance-based budgeting, 
our environmental achievements, and some streamlining 
efficiencies. In some areas we still have a very long way to 
go, for example: long range capital planning, which the LAO 
constantly reminds us of, quite correctly, and in the area of 
human resource development. 

But to sum up, there are about four basic 
conundrums that define the balancing act of management in an 
organization like General Services. The first is how to achieve 
the benefits of centralization in the face of California that's 
very diverse, and something -- that diversity is reflected in 
its public service expectations. 

The second is, how to deliver business services 
efficiently without imposing undue procedural controls, the red 
tape problem. 



The third is, how to secure the resources to 
manage capital over the long run, despite the fact that you have 
cyclical changes in the economy and in the desire, and 
understandable reluctance to engage in capital investment during 
down turns. 

And the fourth is, how to offer and deliver a 
large array of business services in a seamless, 
consumer-friendly fashion, and that's the issue that we're 
paying most attention to right now. 

With that opening, I thank you, and I'm prepared 
to answer any guestions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Could you address the inmate 
phone calls? 

MR. KEENE: This has been a problem at several 
levels, the prison pay phone issue. 

Recently, litigation has been filed and been 
entertained by the courts. What has happened is, prison phones 
have been treated something like, a little bit like a McDonald's 
franchise, where whoever gets the bid and makes a profit, share 
that profit with the state. That's been objected to as a matter 
of policy by a number of Legislators, as you know. 

The RFP has been issued for the replacement of 
the current system, which is a secure system in which inmates 
who have been paying a great deal more, will now begin paying 
less because the state has capped its profits at $26 million, 
which doesn't sound like much right now, but over a period of 
time could be guite substantial. 

The eguipment is currently breaking down. It 



does need replacement. The RFP, the Request for Proposals, is 
something that would go for a three or four year period. And 
the reason for that is, whoever invests in that has to recover 
the cost of doing business. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What do they charge a minute? 

MR. KEENE: I don't know what the charge per 
minute is, but it's considerably more than you would have to pay 
from, say, an ordinary public building or an ordinary pay -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How about 4.99 a minute? 

MR. KEENE: — pay telephone. That's very 
possible . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What does it charge a minute if 
it's the warden, or somebody, calling home or calling long 
distance, calling somewhere? 

MR. KEENE: Well, it would be a lot less. I 
don't know the exact number, but it would be substantially 
less. This is a problem, and I certainly acknowledge it to 
be. 

Part of it, part of the costs are the security 
measures that need to be taken so that people are not called, 
for example, the phone calls have to be monitored so that 
witnesses are not threatened, so that families are not -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How much does that cost? 

MR. KEENE: Well -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: If you know? 

MR. KEENE: I don't know. It would be a 
percentage of the difference between the current charge 
ordinarily and what the prisoners pay now. 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: It could be five percent, could 
be 80 percent. 

It would seem to me, and I know that people have 
very little sympathy for people that are in prison, but it would 
seem to me that 4.99 a minute, and let's assume you're at San 
Quentin, and your family or your lawyer lives in San Rafael, 
which isn't even a toll call, and paying 4.99 a minute just 
seems to be kind of exhorbitant. Not quite bordering on cruel 
and unusual action. 

But I would like, and I've talked to Senator 
Polanco in Sub 4, I'd like to know exactly what it is. In other 
words, how much it costs the state to monitor? Do you monitor 
every call with a human being? Do you monitor on tape? How do 
you do that; do you know, Barry? 

MR. KEENE: Yes, they do monitor them with human 
beings . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So, you have full-time — in 
other words, there's full-time employees at Corrections that are 
just there all day waiting for phones to go out? Do you know? 

MR. KEENE: I believe so. I believe it ' s a 
continuous process, utilizing full-time employees. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: At one time, the money was 
supposed to go into, I think, the Inmate Welfare Fund. 

MR. KEENE: That was one proposal. It is a 
system that's utilized by the counties. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's what they did. Then I 
think that it was under Governor Wilson's administration, right 
after the deregulation bill. It might have been before. So, 



6 



it's general funds. 

But I would ask that you get your staff to figure 
out exactly what it is it costs, why these guys are making so 
much money, and why they're charging so much money for these 
phone calls. 

I personally think that it's outrageous. They're 
charging the recipient of the call. They're charging a family 
who, unless it's Ma Barker, really was not guilty or convicted 
of anything. They're charging the family of somebody in some 
prison for the deeds that that person committed through 
absolutely possibly no fault of the families. 

I just think it's outrageous. I think it ought 
to stop. And I've informed the people at Sub 4 to do 
something. 

I mean, if the state's making 26, I guess there's 
26 million profit, give or take, for the people on the phone 
company, which all in all's not a bad deal for them. No wonder 
that they hire people to lobby to get their phone systems in. 

And Governor Davis, I can see in a moment of 
weakness, vetoed a bill requiring the RFPs to be at the lowest 
possible cost, taking care of the cost of the hiring the people, 
paying the people. 

How many people do you have to have to do the 
monitoring? What do they do when they aren't doing monitoring? 
It sounds like, if all they're doing is monitoring, it sounds 
like a pretty good position, and I mean this sincerely, for 
people going from Welfare to work, because it doesn't seem to me 
to take a lot, except the ability to hear and spot a threat, and 



to get that back to us as soon as you can. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Senator Burton, could I follow 
up on that, please? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Sure. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I visited the CYA recently. 
Those young people, most of them will get out, and they really 
need to keep in touch with their families. 

My question is, is the contract to everybody in 
prison, the CYA, the same contract, or could they have different 
contracts and different costs? 

One of the things that keeps people on the 
straight and narrow is their family encouraging them, and these 
young people especially. If there's any way to look at that, 
maybe if they were separate.. I don't think they should be over 
charged in any case. 

But the young people particularly, their families 
really need to hear from them, and they need to talk to their 
families . 

MR. KEENE: That's a good point. I must say that 
what we mainly looked at, because it seemed to be the principal 
focus of controversy, was the profit taking by the state from 
the contract profits that accrued with the state as a 50 percent 
partner in that. To some extent that was dealt with. 

Now, Senator, the area of possible differential 
between youthful offenders and adult offenders was something 
that we did not look at, but that I will look at and certainly 
get back to you and other interested Members of the Committee 
on. 



8 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: I guess unless somebody's a 
lifer, we hope that when they get out, they'll probably be 
encouraged not to come back in. And to the extent that they're 
able to establish communication with family, I just think the 
whole thing stinks. 

I think that the providers are making too much 
money on the deal, and I think that the state's making money on 
the deal, and I think it's outrageous. Again, it's like coming 
off of and out of the pockets, by and large, of people that 
could probably least afford it, and people, like I say, unless 
it was Ma Barker or somebody, that had nothing to do with 
anything except that it was a family member who was put in 
jail . 

Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Following up on that just 
briefly. 

What does the federal government do? 

MR. KEENE: Well, the federal government has a 
different system. They also have a different technology and a 
different demographic set of prisoners in the federal 
penitentiaries . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: The answer is to get a better 
class of prisoners? Is that what you're saying? 

MR. KEENE: No. I think we have a lot to learn 
from the federal system, can at some point, perhaps, deploy the 
federal system here in California. It's going to reguire a 
major investment in new technology to do that, but it may well 
be worth undertaking. 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: It's a God damn telephone. We 
have telephones. And they can put listening devices on the 
telephones. What's the technology, dixie cup and a string? I 
mean, there's a pay phone. People call. What's the technology? 

It is a way for people in the business sector to 
make exhorbitant profits, and a way for the state to rip off 
some money. It isn't like brain surgery. 

They have a phone that's collect calls only. 
They have them at airports, and there's a way, I'm sure, that 
somebody can figure out that they have hearing devices, or, for 
want of a better word, bugs in them that people can listen to. 

It's not like we're curing cancer. You know, it 
doesn't -- and this was there before you were there, so it's not 
your deal. 

But technology, and this, and demographics. 

You have a thing, and people call out. If you 
had a Pac Bell phone, or whoever, and you didn't have to worry 
about the threats to people, it would be very simple. 

You have to worry about the threats to people, so 
therefore, you install a bug. Although, I think actually in 
some federal prisons they have secure, and nonsecure if you're 
talking to your lawyer. But you install a bug in the phone, and 
it's listening devise that somebody somewhere, sitting where 
ever they sit, can listen to. 

Not big technology. Not big anything. I think 
it's basically a piece of cake. I'll tell you, for $5 million 
profit, I'll figure it out. 

This is something to be looked at. We know that 



10 



the Governor isn't crazy about it, but there is fairly strong 
bipartisan sentiment that it's not the right thing to do. I 
would like to get something back that tells us what's going on, 
what these people do that are listening, what they get paid. 

But the other thing is, there are phones in 
airports. There are phones in hotel lobbies that are collect 
call only. No big deal. Don't need a lot of technology. It's 
just not needed. 

I want to get that in. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Senator Keene, I think there's 
considerable bipartisan agreement on that point. Certainly, the 
system has to be one that allows for detection of threats, or 
intimidation of witnesses, and so on. 

But I personally feel very strongly that the 
state ought not to be making a profit out of this. So, I mean, 
I'm personally outraged, the kind of money I've got to put in a 
coin box out around town, but to have that be a considerable 
upward movement from that is just, it's just not right. 

I want to change the subject and talk about -- 
and I want to make sure I'm pronouncing it right -- the 
Ziggeraut? 

MR. KEENE: That's correct. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Could you tell me about the 
status of that lease, and why that makes sense? 

MR. KEENE: The Legislature mandated that three 
agencies be consolidated at the east end. By the time the east 
end project — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: East end? 



11 



MR. KEENE: I'm sorry, the east end of Capitol 
Park, the large project out there. 

And the three agencies were Health Services, 
Education, and the Department of General Services, which has 
never had the luxury of being consolidated, even though we're 
making desperate efforts to develop a seamless delivery of 
services . 

The east end was short by precisely the amount of 
space that General Services was to occupy. We were told to 
start looking around. We started looking around, and about that 
time, actually shortly before that time, the Ziggeraut became 
available, and it represented exactly the number of square feet 
that was necessary. It looked like an impossibility because of 
the objections of the City of Sacramento to movement across the 
river. It looked like an impossibility because it's a well 
constructed building, energy efficient, and attractive and 
different . 

And because of the difficult position that the 
lessor found itself in, we were able to get a tremendous bargain 
for the taxpayers, and it exactly fit our needs. 

I guess that's the answer. We wound up with a 
lease. And if, after the first six months, they don't produce a 
purchase option, which a number of Members of the Legislature 
were interested in, we get an additional benefit of $6.7 million 
over the 15 to 18 year term of the lease. 

We're hopeful that they'll produce a purchase 
option because we think it would be a good acquisition for the 
people of California. 



12 



SENATOR JOHNSON: I don't want to belabor this, 
and unfortunately, I have to leave momentarily for another 
meeting. 

This is, what, two dollars and fifty cents a 
square foot overall? How many million dollars a month? 

You used the phrase, bargain, and it seems to me 
that this is not necessarily cheap. 

MR. KEENE: Well, it turns into a terrific 
bargain for this reason. It's about 2.20 per square foot, plus 
the energy costs, which is typical of these kinds of leases. 
It raises, over 15 years, to three-and-a-quarter per square 
foot . 

What we'll have to pay in downtown Sacramento 
when the current generation of leases -- we went to leasing as 
sort of a deferred maintenance during the period of recession in 
California. Now we have 8 million square feet of leases in the 
Sacramento area alone. So, those leases will cost in excess of 
three dollars a square foot, the leases that have to be renewed 
over the next couple of years. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: But typically, would you be 
leasing a building? This building, a lot of it -- this was a 
corporate headquarters -- a lot of it is, as I understand it, to 
say the least, opulent offices. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Are you talking about the Money 
Store? 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Yes, the Money Store. 

I wondered what Ziggeraut meant, if that meant 
white elephant in some language I'm not familiar with. 



13 



But how is this immediately transf errable into 
usable space for state employees? Who's going to be occupying 
the offices with the balconies, and who's in charge of the koi 
pond, and the waterfall, and this stuff. 

MR. KEENE: Well, what I can tell you is this, 
economically, this is a tremendous deal for the taxpayers of 
California for several reasons. One is that we're in an 
artificial marketplace if we engage in smart growth and 
development, and keep everything in Sacramento, and pretend that 
the area across the river doesn't exist. So, this is a step 
across the river where things are much cheaper than they are in 
downtown . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: That's certainly not an issue 
in my mind, that it's not in the City of Sacramento, that it's 
on the other shore. That's not an issue in my mind. 

But an issue that's somewhat a serious issue in 
my mind is where could the owners, or in fact the folks who had 
19 years to run on a lease, where could they have found someone 
other than the State of California to take over that lease for 
them is concern of mine. 

Then secondly, is it really that usable in terms 
of space for state agencies. The higher up you get in the 
building, the more luxurious the accommodations they are. I 
just really question the need for those kinds of accommodations, 
and what's going to have to be done with the building to make it 
more usable for state employees. 

Having said that, I also, having known you for 
many years, believe you're a well-qualified individual, and 



14 



certainly intend to support, if I get a chance before I leave, 
your confirmation. 

MR. KEENE: Thank you, Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight, quickly. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I was going to ask, are you going to move your 
offices across the river? 

MR. KEENE: Yes, in fact. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I'm just kidding. 
[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I've got another question. I 
don't want to know what floor you're going to be on. 

MR. KEENE: I think it's number seven. We're 
going to break up the opulent -- 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I've got a question concerning 
the Disabled Veterans Business Enterprises. By law, three 
percent of contracts are supposed to go to these individuals, 
these veterans. 

What are we doing to make sure that that happens? 

MR. KEENE: We're engaged in extensive 
monitoring. We're working much more closely with the disabled 
veterans groups to assure that it is happening. We're hopeful 
that we're doing a better job than before. 

We have not yet reached the goals we would like 
to reach with that program. 

The same thing is true of small business. We're 
a little bit further ahead with small business than we are with 
disabled veterans. 



15 



SENATOR KNIGHT: What percentage are we at right 
now, approximately? 

MR. KEENE: I'll have to check. I'll have to 
check the numbers. I have the numbers with me. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I'd like to know where we are, 
and what we plan to do to improve that situation. 

Thank you. 

MR. KEENE: The estimates of DVBE participation 
are approximately 2.75 percent of the let contracts over the 
last fiscal year. So, we're close to the three percent 
participation goal. It was met twice over a four-year period. 
It was met two out of the four years, but the over all is 2.75, 
so we're not quite up to the three percent. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Three percent is a goal, so 
there's nothing that prevents us from going over three percent. 
It ' s not a max . 

MR. KEENE: No, it ' s a goal. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Could I move. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Moved by Senator Karnette. 

First of all, do you have family here, Barry? 

MR. KEENE: I do have family here. Perhaps they 
can stand up in order to safe the Committee time. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support, 
briefly. I think the Building Trades and Oracle. 

Witnesses in opposition. 

Hearing none, moved by Senator Karnette. 

Any objection, all Members who are on the roll be 
recorded aye. 



16 



Congratulations, Barry. 

MR. KEENE: I want to thank you very, very much. 
Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Soto. 

Why don't you bring them both up and save some 
time, William Burke and Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta . 

SENATOR SOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman 
and colleagues, Mr. Burke. 

It is my pleasure to present Dr. Burke. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What are you doctor of, if I 
may ask? 

DR. BURKE: Education. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Oh, yeah, one of those. 

SENATOR SOTO: I've known Dr. Burke for a long, 
long time. In his career, he has had many, many leadership 
positions and an outstanding citizen of the City of Los 
Angeles . 

I guess I met Dr. Burke at his very first year up 
here when he was working at the Capitol in about 1966. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: He was doing radio for Speaker 
Unruh . 

DR. BURKE: Do you remember that? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I remember the salary, but I'm 
not going to tell anybody. 

DR. BURKE: I'm ashamed of it. 

SENATOR SOTO: I have had the pleasure of knowing 
Dr. Burke for all those years. But specifically, in the last, I 
imagine it's been the last eight to ten years that we've worked 



17 



very closely. 

Besides many of the positions that he has had in 
leadership in the City of Los Angeles, and I'll name just a few, 
we served together on the AQMD Board of Directors, of which he 
is now the President. He is now President of the City of Los 
Angeles Marathon, and he has presided over the American Health 
Care Delivery Corporation, and has served on the Gold Mining 
Industry as Chairman of the Board position of Genesis 
International at the L.A. based mining development holding 
company. And from 1981 to 1984, he supervised the planning and 
construction of mining concessions in Liberia, West Africa, for 
the World Mining Development Company. 

In 1984, Dr. Burke was appointed as Commissioner 
of Tennis for the Summer Olympic games in the City of Los 
Angeles . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do you want to get up to about 



1998 



sooner 



SENATOR SOTO: I'll get up to that a little bit 



That's just one of many things that Dr. Burke has 
done in his history. I won't go through all of them, because 
it's quite extensive and very impressive. 

The one that I know Dr. Burke the best for is 
because we served together on the AQMD Board of Directors. He 
had been appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly at that time, 
in 1993, and I started with the Board of Directors in 1993, just 
a little bit after Dr. Burke had been appointed. I served on 
that Board for four-and-a-half years and had the pleasure of 



18 



nominating him and voting for him to serve as President of the 
AQMD Board of Directors in 1984 [sic] . He has since then been 
elected again and appointed this time by the Governor to serve 
on the Board again. 

So, I am asking for your approval of Dr. Burke as 
Chairman. But I thought a little bit of his background on his 
education, if you don't mind, Dr. Burke. I think it's 
impressive . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: It doesn't bother him, but 
we've got a time problem. 

SENATOR SOTO: I'll just tell you, he has 
multiple degrees: Bachelor of Science from Miami University; 
Doctorate of Education from the University of Massachusetts; 
two other honorary doctorates. 

Among other awards in the '60s, Dr. Burke has 
received a Meritorious Service Award from the City of Los 
Angeles; the First Annual Living Legends Award; the Humanitarian 
Award from the Mid City Chamber of Commerce; and the Green Tower 
Foundation as the Man of the Year Award. 

Dr. Burke is married to L.A. County Supervisor 
Yvonne Burke, and they have two daughters, Christine and Autumn. 

I'm very honored to be presenting to you today 
Dr. William Burke. 

DR. BURKE: Senator, I can cut mine to thank you 
and thank you. It starts with thank you and ends with thank 
you, in the interests of time, if you'd like me to. 

[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: We do have the statement of 



19 



your goals 



Senator Knight, do you have any questions? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What did you do with that 500 a 



month. 



[Laughter. ] 

DR. BURKE: Don't tell these people that. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Basically you have support. 

There's one question about the Air Resources 
Board that, when they were developing the state's implementation 
plan, then basically to get it implemented, some of the enviros 
had to file suit. 

Do you know what led them to that action at 
all? 

DR. BURKE: Which suit, sir? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You're supposed to answer 
questions, not ask them. 

[Laughter . ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I don't know. It ' s a couple 
questions here, they were talking about the fact that when you 
were doing the state's implementation plan, they were slow in 
dealing with it. So, it was in 1997, September 18, to be exact. 

Can you recall back that far? 

DR. BURKE: You're talking about AQMD. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Right. 

DR. BURKE: Yes. That lawsuit was indeed filed by 



20 



the enviros and was settled out of court when we came up with 
some methods by which we speeded up and corrected the situations 
which they were concerned about. 

It was part of an effort which was led by myself 
and Senator Soto to correct the situation, which we felt was 
untenable ourselves within the district. It had been, at best, 
insensitive to the needs of the environmentally challenged. 

What I immediately did after that lawsuit was 
settled, I was elected Chairman. And the day I was elected 
Chairman, I issued an environmental justice initiative, which 
set out a ten-point program, which has been accomplished, I'm 
proud to say, in the two years of my first term as Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What in your judgment are the 
most effective ways for local air districts to ensure that 
regulated facilities comply with the standards? 

DR. BURKE: I think it's going to take both a 
combined system of command and control, and reclaimed credit 
system. It's a very delicate balance to keep the economy 
rolling and the people protected. 

But what I'm probably most proud of is the fact 
that when I came to the AQMD, there was a very contentious 
relationship with both the Legislature and the community at 
large. Over the past five years, I think we've made some 
significant strides in both mending our relationships with the 
Legislature and moving out to reach out to those people who had 
unfortunately in the past not been at the table in air guality 
issues in Southern California. 

Our district represents 41 percent of the 



21 



population of this state. And quite frankly, a large majority 
of those people were not involved in the decision-making process 
at all. And that's, I feel, why Senator Soto is here today, 
because we bucked some pretty strong winds initially to get that 
turned around, and I think we have. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Just one question. 

Would you support eliminating the veto authority 
of air boards on the transfers air credits from one air district 
to another? 

DR. BURKE: Would I support the veto — 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Eliminating the veto authority 
of air boards on the transfer of air credits from one air 
district to another? 

We've got a new power plant that's being built in 
Victorville in the Antelope Valley. 

DR. BURKE: Let me tell you, in the area of power 
plants, I'm not quite sure where I'd be to the credit issue 
because I think we need to be able to shift credits around the 
state to provide so that power plants can be built as 
expeditiously as possible. 

So, what we did at AQMD just two weeks ago was, 
we allocated two-and-a-half million dollars to the permit 
processing unit of AQMD so every permit not only goes through — 
you know, it used to be that they get backed up in the AQMD for 
a substantial length of time. Now if you come to South Coast 
and you're not out in six months, somebody loses their job. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Okay. I have no other 



22 



questions . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: One air basin is somewhat 
different than other air basins. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I guess the air in the L.A. 
basin is certainly completely different than the air basin in 
the Antelope Valley or the Victor Valley. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: My point exactly. 

Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: The ZEVs, do you have any 
position on how to work with the idea that we have more ZEVs, 
you know, motorists with increased costs? 

DR. BURKE: I wish you hadn't asked me that 
question, Senator. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Well, I'm on Transportation. 

DR. BURKE: I voted for the ZEV mandate bill 
because I understand that the technology must be pushed forward, 
not only in this state, but in this country and in the world. 

But I have grave reservations if electric vehicle 
technology is our answer. And I am concerned as it relates to 
CARB ' s kind of blind moving forward with electric vehicles only, 
when there are other technologies outs there which could provide 
us with more bang for the buck. 

And when you have cars that are running on 
natural combustion engines, and their emissions are cleaner than 
the air that they're taking in, I think that, you know, you're 
really on the cutting edge of technology, and you really need to 
even encourage that technology more. 

So, I've seen in the last six months some 



23 



technology breakthroughs that are just incredible. These micro 
turbines that they put in cars, they can burn diesel, and the 
emissions are less than they are in ultra-low emission 
vehicles . 

So, why would you not take some of this money 
that you're forcing these car manufacturers to use and encourage 
this other technology, too? 

I know we have a time problem, but I had the real 
pleasure of discussing this issue with Dr. Ballard, who invented 
the fuel cell. And he looked at me and he said, you know, very 
directly, "If you think that three guys sitting around a 
cocktail table at night at my house 15 years ago designed the 
answer to the energy problem in the world, you've got to be 
nuts . " 

He said it was just three guys sitting around a 
cocktail table. He said there are now 17,000 people a day 
working full time on trying to solve this problem. He says we 
probably don't even know what the answer is out there yet, 
because there are so many technologies coming so fast and so 
furious . 

So, I'm not sure that we ought to -- the New York 
Times said that California had had the political will to pass 
the ZEV mandate, but now does not have the political will to 
re-evaluate it, and I kind of agree with that. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Spoken like a real scientist. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Are you a scientist? 

DR. BURKE: No, you know I'm not a scientist. 
You know what I really am. That's why I'm here. 



24 



[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I'm wondering about your 
interest all this stuff. 

Did you bring the family up, Bill? 

DR. BURKE: No, I came by myself. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move it. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Moved by Senator Karnette. 

Anybody in opposition? 

FROM THE AUDIENCE: The Truckers actually want to 
support . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Fine. You have Don Brown next 
with the Truckers for him. It augers well for people, they're 
supportive of you. 

Any objection, all Members are on the roll 
saying Aye. Passed by the Committee. 

Congratulations . 

DR. BURKE: Thank you very much. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Now, you tell the Supervisor 
that she owes me a big one because you guys can take your trip. 

DR. BURKE: I will pass that along directly. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Soto. 

SENATOR SOTO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I now you have pleasure of introducing and 
presenting to you for approval is the Governor's appointee, 
Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta as his representative on the AQMD Board 
of Directors. 

Ms. Peralta is a state-certified energy 
efficiency specialist and has been for 27 years in the utility 



25 



industry. And over the years, she's provided expert testimony 
in the areas of energy and the environment for the California 
Public Utilities Commission, the California Council for 
Environmental and Economic Balance, the Federal and State 
Environmental Protection Agencies, the Metropolitan Water 
District of Southern California, and the AQMD, and other 
utilities regulatory agencies. 

I'm not going to go into any more of her 
background because, as you can see if you have her resume in 
front of you, she's very well gualified. 

But I did serve with Cynthia -- excuse me, Ms. 
Peralta -- for about three or four year on the AQMD Committee 
for Ethnic Communities. We were very instrumental in turning 
around the hiring practices at the AQMD Board of Directors to 
take into consideration more minority contracts and more 
minority hirings. So, I can attest to Ms. Peralta's concern for 
those things, and also concern for environmental justice. 

I know that she will make a very, very good 
member of the Board, and has been serving now for, I think, 
about six or seven months. And I recommend her approval for the 
AQMD Board of Directors. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Could you give a comment on 
what the Board's plans may be to address the issue of 
environmental justice, and how you mitigate disproportionate 



26 



health impacts on low income minority populations? 

I don't know what they do down there, but in the 
district I represent, they tend to put plants and certain 
polluting things in areas where the community, they would think, 
doesn't have the political strength to overcome them. Although, 
fortunately in several instances, we have. 

So, if you could just address your thoughts on 
that. 

MS. VERDUGO-PERALTA: What the district has 
presently is, we have the Ethnic Community Advisory Group, which 
consists of three caucuses. There are ten members to each 
caucus. One is the African American Caucus, the Latino Caucus, 
the Asian Pacific Islander Caucus. And from each of those 
caucuses, there's one member that's also a Native American 
representative . 

We encourage the public to come to those 
meetings. Those members are representatives of the 
constituencies out in the community. They bring the concerns of 
the community to that particular board, and then, in turn, we 
bring that to the regular board. 

I know that the AQMD has done a lot of workshops, 
a lot of town hall meetings, especially in areas of low income 
and diversity. 

There has also been an effort that I have seen at 
the AQMD, because I've been working with them for about the last 
eight years, and even before that was observing them, and it's 
been a 180-degree turnaround of the way that they are 
outreaching to the community and making sure that everybody has 



27 



a voice. They will actually go out there to, let's say, a small 
business, a minority small business, to try and work with them 
if it has anything to do with a compliance or a permitting 
issue. So, there has been a lot of effort on their part. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Any other questions? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I have one question about the 
ethanol, and whether requiring that to be transported into 
communities surrounding refineries. 

How will this be addressed, because it's going to 
come up, I'm sure. 

MS. VERDUGO-PERALTA: Well, our staff has been 
very diligent in trying to -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Ethanol or methanol? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: This is ethanol in this 
question here. Methanol, too, though. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Methanol's corn; isn't it? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Methanol is corn, but we're 
not using that yet. 

MS. VERDUGO-PERALTA: Any of the toxics that they 
have had a concern over -- for instance, even amonia, amonia 
slippage on some of the power plants on the types of selective 
catalytic reduction emission controls -- any type of toxic that 
may be coming into a particular area, the staff that we have, 
they make sure that they know what the emissions are going to 
be, and how that's going to affect the surrounding community. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I've been involved when I was 
teaching. I taught in an area in Wilmington, and this was 
really a serious concern with all those refineries. 



28 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Did you bring any family 
members . 

MS. VERDUGO-PERALTA: Yes, sir. I brought my 
husband, Art Peralta, who's a forester and wood product 
specialist . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Welcome, sir. 

Any witnesses in opposition? We'll notice the 
Truckers are here, supporting ZEV and other things. 

Moved by Senator Knight. Any objection to the 
Members on the Committee present that the roll be recorded? 
Hearing none, Ayes four, Noes none. 

Congratulations on your confirmation. 

SENATOR SOTO: Thank you very much, Committee. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 

Senate Rules Committee hearing 

was terminated at approximately. 

2:26 P.M. ] 

--00O00-- 



29 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 



I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 



+*<■ 



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 



J_ day of (.£l.^ii£ 



, 2001 




r 



C" 



,*~i f 



7 



Jit/.. 



£_ 



' EVELYN J. MIZAK y 
Shorthand Reporter 






422-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 422-R when ordering. 



^HEARING 

; SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

*&* 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

MAY 2 1 2001 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2001 
2:00 P.M. 



423- R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2 01 
2:00 P.M. 



Transcribed by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 

MEMBERS PRESENT 

SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 

SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 

SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 

MEMBERS ABSENT 

SENATOR ED VINCENT 

STAFF PRESENT 

GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 

TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 

CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

CAROLYN ROBINSON, Consultant to SENATOR VINCENT 

ALSO PRESENT 

DAVID CARLISLE, M.D., Ph.D., Director 

Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development 

DAVID QUACKENBUSH 

California Hispanic Health Care Association 

BETH CAPELL 

California Physicians Alliance, Health Access, SEIU 

RICHARD BROWN, M.D. 

Public Health Professor, UCLA 



CRAIG A. COPELAN 

Professional Engineers in California Government 



Ill 



ROBERT BROOK, M.D. 
Professor of Medicine, UCLA 
RAND Health 

HOWARD L. HARRIS 

California Health Policy & Data Advisory Committee 

PETER SILVA, Member 

State Water Resources Control Board 

JACKSON GUALCO 

Imperial Irrigation District and 

Modesto Irrigation District 



IV 

INDEX 

Page 

Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

DAVID M. CARLISLE, M.D., Director 

Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Goals and Objectives 1 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Amount State Spends on Programs to 

Increase Health Professionals in 

Underserved Areas of State 2 

Adequacy of Such Funding 3 

Types of Underserved Areas 3 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Seismic Retrofitting of Hospitals 4 

Witnesses in Support: 

DAVID QUACKENBUSH 

California Hispanic Healthcare Association 4 

BETH CAPELL 

California Physicians Alliance 

Health Access California 

Service Employees International Union 5 

RICHARD BROWN, M.D. 

Professor of Public Health 

Director, Center for Health Policy Research 

UCLA 6 

CRAIG COPELAN 

Professional Engineers in California Government 6 



] 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



v 



ROBERT BROOK, M.D. 

Professor of Medicine for Public Health 

UCLA 7 

HOWARD HARRIS, Commissioner 

California Health Policy and Data 

Advisory Commission 7 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation 8 

Response by DR. BROOK 8 

Motion to Confirm 9 

Committee Action 9 

PETER S. SILVA, Member 

State Water Resources Control Board 9 

Background and Experience 10 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Tanks Leaking MTBE 12 

Witness in Support: 

JACKSON GUALCO 

Imperial Irrigation District 

Modesto Irrigation District 12 

Motion to Confirm 13 

Committee Action 13 

Termination of Proceedings 14 

Certificate of Reporter 15 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Have a seat, please, Doctor. 

Go ahead, Doctor, please. 

DR. CARLISLE: Mr. Chairman and Members of the 
Senate Rules Committee, I am David M. Carlisle. 

I truly appreciate this opportunity to present 
before, seeking confirmation of my appointment as Director of the 
Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. 

At this point I'd like to introduce to the 
Committee: my wife, Dr. Sylvia Carlisle; my son David; my 
daughter Amy; my mother Alma Carlisle; and my Aunt Joyce. 

I bring to the office over 20 years of experience 
in health care, with a chief emphasis on the needs of underserved 
communities. This experience includes 9 years as an academician 
and researcher on the faculty of the UCLA School of Medicine, and 
11 years as a health care provider at the Watts Health 
Foundation, Kaiser Permanente, UCLA, and the Venice Family Clinic 
where I continue to serve as a volunteer physician. 

I also bring familiarity with the office, having 
served as a consumer representative on three OSHPD committees 
since 1992. 

I intend to achieve three major goals during my 
tenure as Director. These are, one, redefining the mission of 
the office to be that of promoting accessibility to health care 
so that Californians are able to find health care facilities and 



providers when and where they need them. 

Two, fully utilizing the informational, 
programmatic, and analytic capabilities of the office to address 
California's needs in the area of health policy. 

And three, improving the operational effectiveness 
of the office in order to make it more responsive to the health 
care needs of all Calif ornians . 

My objective is to position OSHPD to serve as a 
tremendous resource for the administration, Legislators, 
consumers, researchers, prospective health care professionals, 
and other health policy stakeholders on such issues as: quality 
of health care; developing the health care workforce of the 
future; and promoting access to health care. 

It is indeed a tremendous honor to be asked by 
Governor Gray Davis to serve his administration and the people of 
this great, complex, and wonderfully diverse state. I will do my 
utmost to meet the challenges and responsibilities of this 
position. 

Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you, Doctor. 

Do you know about how much the state spends on 
programs to increase health professionals in underserved areas of 
the state, like possibly the inner cities, and more likely the 
boondocks and the rural areas? 

DR. CARLISLE: I'm not familiar with total state 
expenditures in this area, but our office spends approximately $5 



million on such programs out of our budget. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Have you been there long enough 
to know whether that's adequate, inadequate, or overly generous? 

DR. CARLISLE: Well, I think we still have 
underserved areas in California, despite the best of our efforts. 

One of my chief targets is to increase our 
activities in this area. I'd like to see us really expand our 
efforts to promote the provision of health services in 
underserved areas . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Are they mostly rural areas that 
are underserved, or some of the urban, too? 

DR. CARLISLE: Well, it depends on how you look at 
it. 

If you look at the number of areas, and things like 
square miles, certainly the rural areas contain large, 
underserved areas. In fact, most technically underserved areas 
in California are in more rural areas. 

But if you look at populations, underserved 
populations, then the urban areas -- urban inner city areas and 
other areas -- actually contain the great population of 
underserved Calif ornians . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 



SENATOR KARNETTE: I just want to ask about 
retrofitting hospitals. This seems to be a very big problem. 

How do you see it? When will we get it completed? 

DR. CARLISLE: Well, the legislation, of course, 
everyone is familiar with, has several milestones. It's very 
important that everyone know that the first milestone of the 
retrofitting milestone is in January of the year 2000, when 
hospitals must convert all their nonstructural performance 
standard hospitals or buildings from Level I to Level II. That's 
the first retrofitting hurdle. 

The major structural hurdle occurs in 2008, or the 
initial one. That's when hospitals have to convert themselves 
from the lowest structural performance category into at least the 
next highest category. Those hospitals that intend to be in 
service beyond 2 030, or those buildings that intend to be in 
service beyond 2 03 may then extend that deadline by five 
additional years to 2013. And then, by 2030, all hospitals must 
be in SPC Category III, IV or V; that's structural performance 
category III, IV or V. 

So, this is a 30-year rollout. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support, briefly. 

MR. QUACKENBUSH: Good afternoon. I'm David 
Quackenbush from the California Hispanic Healthcare Association. 

We're here to lend our support to Dr. Carlisle. As 
noted, he has extensive experience in education and public 
health, and performed research in the areas of access, quality, 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



and disparities in health care. 

We've had several opportunities to meet with 
Dr. Carlisle, and he does share some of our concerns regarding 
the abundant diversity within the uninsured and medically 
indigent populations in California, and also the importance to 
increase the cultural competency and understanding of the health 
care providers of the patients they serve. 

So, we do lend all of our support and are very 
happy to be here in support of him today. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Next. 

MS. CAPELL: Beth Capell on behalf of the 
California Physicians Alliance, Health Access California, and the 
Service Employees International Union. 

We're pleased to be here in support of 
Dr. Carlisle. He is a member of the California Physicians 
Alliance. He is also -- and I trust no Senator will hold that 
against him -- he was also our Health Access's representative, 
the consumer representative to at least one of those committees 
that he mentioned, lo those many years ago. 

And we have worked -- he's also served on the 
Health Access Policy Committee, helping us to develop our policy 
agenda on covering the uninsured. 

So, we've had the opportunity to meet with him in 
this new capacity and to discuss issues such as community benefit 
definitions for hospitals, charity care, and other issues, and 
are looking forward to the opportunity to work with him. 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

Next. 

DR. BROWN: I'm Dr. Richard Brown, Professor of 
Public Health at UCLA, and Director of the Center for Health 
Policy Research there. 

I've known Dr. Carlisle for quite some time, and I 
am very impressed with his record as a physician, which I think 
will help him be more sensitive to and understand the needs of 
patients and of health professionals in the system, and his 
research record on disparities in health care and efforts to 
identify them, and reduce them. 

I think his work in this field, his knowledge of 
the data, will enable him to help make the data sing, to help and 
form policy more effectively, and to provide leadership for the 
state in this area. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Data sing? 

DR. BROWN: Well, that's just a phrase. It really 
means to help make the data come alive in forming policy, as 
opposed to sitting there as simply dry numbers that mean nothing 
to most people. 

Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Next. 

MR. COPELAN: Good afternoon. My name is Craig 
Copelan with Professional Engineers in California Government. 

Our members have had an opportunity to meet with 
Dr. Carlisle, and we're looking forward to working with him on 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



the seismic retrofitting of hospitals in the future. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Data which sings, and datum would 
sing? 

DR. BROOK: Hi, I'm Robert Brook, and I don't sing. 
I'm a Professor of Medicine for Public Health at UCLA, and run 
the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar program there, and also 
run RAND Health in Santa Monica. 

David I've known since he became a Robert Wood 
Johnson clinical scholar about 15 years ago. He represents the 
best of physicians who have engaged in the activities of health 
services research, health policy, and administration. And I put 
him in the same league as other people we have trained, which 
include the current Surgeon General, David Satcher, and the past 
head of the Department of Health in New York State, Mark Chassen. 

So, David's research, clinical background, 
teaching, and all that, will make him a wonderful person to run 
this office. 

MR. HARRIS: Good afternoon. My name is Howard 
Harris . 

Although I can't speak for the Commission, I sit as 
a Commissioner on the California Health Policy and Data Advisory 
Commission. 

And I'd like to speak to the knowledge that I've 
had of working with Dr. Carlisle as a Commissioner, and his 
addressing issues such as the primary care physicians. We worked 
beginning probably about 1989 on various committees of that sort, 






2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



8 

and his interest in the health professional development of 
manpower, womanpower, workforce, continues to be reflected in his 
directorship at OSHPD. 

So, we support his nomination. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What is the Robert Wood Johnson 
Foundation? Where did he get all his ability to have that 
foundation? 

DR. BROOK: Robert Wood Johnson, he developed the 
Johnson & Johnson Band-Aids of the street . Made a lot of money 
from selling Band-Aids. 

[Laughter. ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: He got beyond that, as I recall. 

DR. BROOK: Not very far beyond that; Band-Aids 
were enough . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I think it was a long since that 
he was hustling them on the street. 

DR. BROOK: That is correct. He's no longer with 
us, but it's been a long time since - 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: His foundation does a lot of good 
work . 

DR. BROWN: Absolutely, and of them has been to 
train about 500 or 600 of the outstanding leaders in American 
medicine today, and we're lucky at UCLA, because we've trained 
about 150 of them, and he's certainly one of them. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Any witnesses in opposition? 

Hearing none, moved by Senator Johnson. Secretary, 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



call the roll 



the Committee. 



SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Four to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations, Doctor. 

DR. CARLISLE: Thank you, Senator, and Members of 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you again, Doctor. 

Peter Silva, State Water Resources Control Board. 

We have a nice letter here in support from Senator 



Kelley 



SECRETARY WEBB: Assembly Member Kelley. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: He's still a Senator in our eyes. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Once a Senator, always a Senator. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Go ahead, sir. 

MR. SILVA: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and 
Members of the Committee. My name is Peter Silva. 

First, I want to introduce my beautiful wife here 
who is with me today, Donna; and a nephew of mine that takes care 
of a vineyard here for Old Spice Sacramento, Indias Chidas . 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

.7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



10 

As a native Calif ornian, I strongly believe that 
California should always strive to be the leader in all the major 
issues that face the nation. California must be able to continue 
to grow and prosper economically, while at the same time, 
ensuring the protection of the state's valuable natural 
resources . 

Through its mandates, the State Water Board plays a 
key role in the management of the state's water supplies, with 
the two main functions of water rights and water quality. 

First, in the area of water rights, resolution of 
the Bay-Delta and other water allocation questions will have 
profound, long-term impacts on the overall state water balance. 
Important issues such as agriculture and urban water allocations, 
water for environmental protection, and intra- state water 
transfers are being debated through the Water Board process. 

Very recently, a state energy crisis has brought an 
additional element of complexity to the water rights picture. 
The new element illustrates the need to review and improve the 
water rights process. 

In the area of water quality, substantial progress 
has been made in protecting the state's surface waters from 
pollution. However, there are growing threats to the state's 
groundwater resources. Issues such as MTBE and Chromium 6 
pollution illustrate the manner in which unforeseen sources of 
contamination can produce devastating effects. 

In addition to groundwater contamination, the state 



2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



11 

must also address a number of issues associated with nonpoint 
source pollution. TMDL regulations must continue to be 
implemented, along with other programs that regulate Chromium, 
water runoff, and other nonpoint source pollution. 

Because of my professional experience, I'm also 
interested in promoting better U.S. -Mexico relations in water 
management issues. California and Baja California are united by 
a common border and share water resources, and pollution, and 
problems that must be addressed through national cooperation and 
coordination. 

It is clear that the water issues facing California 
continue to evolve and tend to become much more multi- faceted and 
complex. In response, the Water Board must also evolve and 
create new and innovative ways to address these issues. 

I look forward to the opportunity to work on these 
issues as a member of the State Water Resources Control Board. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to address 
you, and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Thank you very much, sir. 

Senator Knight, any questions? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: No questions. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Senator Karnette? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I was somewhat pleased when you 
mentioned the border, and what are the problems that we have 
along the border . 

But my question has to do with MTBE, because 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



12 



evidently, sometimes we think there are no leaks, but when tanks 
are removed, we find out there are leaks. 

Are there any ideas in that area? 

MR. SILVA: Well, we're continuing to work on our 
underground storage tank program, which provides funding, first 
of all, to the stations that need tank rehabilitation. 

But we also, obviously, through the regional 
boards, work on enforcement issues related to groundwater 
contamination. So, we'll continue to enforce those regulations 
as necessary. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: This really is a problem, when 
we hear so much about it . 

MR. SILVA: That's correct. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: All right, any support in the 
audience feels compelled to share their thinking with us? 

MR. GUALCO: Mr. Chair and Member, Jack Gualco on 
behalf of both the Imperial Irrigation District and the Modesto 
Irrigation District. 

Pleased to be here in support of Mr. Silva. I've 
had the pleasure of knowing not only Pete, but members of his 
family for a number of years. In fact, his brother is the 
general manager of the Imperial Irrigation District, so I was 
compelled to be here today. Otherwise, I'd find myself in the 
Ail-American Canal at some point in my next visit to Imperial. 

But he is undoubtedly - 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Just as long as it's not 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



13 

permanently. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. GUALCO: That's right. 

He's undoubtedly very well qualified for this job, 
given his background in both technically and policy-wise. And 
most importantly, as Senator Karnette indicated, given our cross- 
border relationships with Mexico in both water and power, his 
knowledge in that area is going to be very important to the 
success of the Water Board. 

So, we urge your endorsement of his appointment. 
Thank you. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Any witnesses in opposition? 
Speak now or forget it . 

What's the pleasure of the Committee, please? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Secretary, call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB : Karnette Aye . Senator Knight . 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Four to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 



14 



1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



MR. SILVA: Thank you. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 
Senate Rules Committee hearing 
was terminated at approximately 
2:30 P.M.] 

--00O00— 



15 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 

2 

3 I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 

4 of California, do hereby certify: 

5 That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
transcribed verbatim by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or attorney 
for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way interested 
in the outcome of said hearing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 



.7 



9 
10 
11 
12 

13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



-'- ^ ^ day of CCjl^C , 2001 




w 



ljut/. 



EVELYN JV MIZAK 
Shorthand Reporter 



423-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 423-R when ordering. 



Z HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 




MAY 2 1 2001 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 2001 
1:50 P.M. 



424- R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 



WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 2 001 
1:50 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 



MEMBERS PRESENT 



SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 

SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 

SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT 

SENATOR GLORIA ROMERO 

STAFF PRESENT 

GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 

PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 

SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 

TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 

DAVID OROSCO, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

ALSO PRESENT 

JAMES W. HAMLET, Warden 

Correctional Training Facility, Soledad 

JEFFRY P. MORALES, Director 
Department of Transportation 

SENATOR JIM COSTA 

SENATOR JOE DUNN 

PAUL MEYER 

Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of California 

MARTY TUTTLE 
SACOG 

DENNIS ALEXANDER 

Professional Engineers in California Government 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



111 



MARK WATTS 
Transportation California 

WARREN HOEMANN 

California Trucking Association 

MEL ASSAGAI 

California Trucking Association 

California Urban League Executives 

FRANK RAMIREZ 

National Indian Contractors- Association 

American G.I. Forum 

TONY GRASSO 

Associated General Contractors of California 

PAT LEATHERS 

Southern California Rock Products Association 

TIM CREMINS 

Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO 

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, Warden 
California State Prison, San Quentin 

ROY MABRY, State President 

Association of Black Correctional Workers 

ELAINE HILL 

California State Employees Association 

ANTHONY JONES, Chapter President 

California Correctional Peace Officers Association 

VERNELL M. CRITTENDON, JR. 
San Quentin Employee 



IV 

INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

JAMES W. HAMLET, Warden 

Correctional Training Facility, Soledad 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Plans for Institution 1 

Health Care Delivery System 2 

Lawsuits 2 

Pre-release Programs to Reduce 

Recidivism 2 

Waiting Lists for Inmate Jobs 3 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Appropriateness of State Making 

Money on Inmate Telephone Calls 4 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Reason for Feeling State's Profit 

On Inmate Calls Is Appropriate 4 

Justification for Opinion 5 

Nominee' s Confirmation Put Over 5 

JEFFREY P. MORALES, Director 

Department of Transportation 6 

Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR JIM COSTA 6 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR JOSEPH DUNN 7 

Background and Experience 8 

Key Areas of Focus 8 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Determination of Occupancy Required for 

Diamond Lanes 10 

Bay Bridge Project 11 

Financing Cost Overrun on Bay 

Bridge Project 12 

Any Way to Reduce Costs 13 

Questions by SENATOR JOHNSON re: 

Aesthetics Is Major Difference in 

Bay Bridge Consideration 13 

Cost Overrun 14 

Current Position with Project Delivery 15 

Percentage of STIP Projects Currently 

Going Forward 15 

Fund Balance in State Highway Account 17 

Implementation of Proposition 35 18 

Vacancy Rate at Caltrans 18 

Memo of Kelly Brooks Relating to 

Vacancies at Caltrans 20 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

State's Role in Regional Transportation 

STIP 22 

Caltrans' Role in Energy Crisis 23 



VI 



Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Plans for Highway 138 Project 2 5 

Questions by SENATOR ROMERO re: 

Caltrans as Absentee Landlord 26 

Preparations for Growth of Trade as 

Result of NAFTA 28 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

How NAFTA Might Impair Truck 

Safety Stops 28 

Witnesses in Support : 

PAUL MEYER 

Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of 

California 29 

MARTY TUTTLE 

SACOG 29 

DENNIS ALEXANDER 

Professional Engineers in California 

Government 29 

MARK WATTS 

Transportation in California 29 

WARREN HOEMANN 

California Trucking Association 29 

MEL ASSAGAI 

California Trucking Association 

California Urban League Executives 30 

FRANK RAMIREZ 

Native American Contractors Association 

American GI Forum 30 

TONY GRASSO 

Associated General Contractors of 

California 30 



Vll 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 



23 
24 

25 



PAT LEATHERS 

Southern California Rock Products 

Association 3 

TIM CREMINS 

Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO 

State Bargaining Unit 12, Maintenance Workers 3 

Motion to Confirm 31 

Committee Action 31 

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, Warden 

California State Prison, San Quentin 32 

Background and Experience 32 

Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

Comments on Telephone Situation 32 

High Level of Volunteerism at 

San Quentin 33 



Visitor' s Center 34 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Serious Problem at San Quentin 35 

18 Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re 

19 

20 

21 Questions by SENATOR ROMERO re: 



Dependency on Telephone Funds 

By Counties as Justification 3 7 



22 Efforts to Avoid Violent Incidents 

And Available Educational Programs 38 



Expansion to B.A. Degree Program 38 

Policies of Physical Separation 3 9 

26 Questions by CHAIRMAN BURTON re: 

27 Determinate Sentencing Vs. Indeterminate 41 

28 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



Vlll 



Violence Control Program 41 

Witnesses in Support: 

ROY MABRY, State President 

Association of Black Correctional Workers 42 

ELAINE HILL 

Correctional Institutions Committee 

CSEA 43 

ANTHONY JONES, Chapter President 

California Correctional Peace Officers 

Association 44 

VERNELL CRITTENDON, Employee 

San Quentin State Prison 45 

Motion to Confirm 46 

Committee Action 46 

Termination of Proceedings 47 

Certificate of Reporter 48 

Attachment in Support of MR. MORALES: 
"Statement of RALPH H. WEBB, 
Executive Director, Interstate 5 Consortium 
Cities Joint Powers Authority 
Los Angeles /Orange Counties" 49 



5 
6 
7. 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: James Hamlet, Warden, Soledad. 

We have your statement for the record, so if you 
just might summarize, briefly, and then be ready for questions, 
sir. 

MR. HAMLET: My name is Jim Hamlet. I'm with the 
Correctional Training Facility at Soledad. I've been there 27 
years. I started as a canteen manager, worked my way up through 
various assignments at the prison. 

As each assignment went by, I gained more and more 
experience into the prison environment, and have been challenged 
over the last few years in the management positions I've held, 
from Associate Warden, Business Services, up through Chief Deputy 
Warden, to Warden. 

I started with the Department of Corrections after 
working my way through college, and it's been one of the most 
rewarding experiences I've had in my life to date. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What are your plans for the 
institution? 

MR. HAMLET: Keep the institution safe. Keep the 
staff and the inmates safe, and continue to ensure that we keep 
it nice and quiet, and that you don't hear of us up here in 
Sacramento . 

SENATOR KNIGHT: That's a good objective. 
[Laughter . ] 



MR. HAMLET: We were fortunate this last year, 
haven't made any newspapers. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Can you give us your view of the 
health care delivery system within your institution? 

MR . HAMLET : We have a very good one . Most 
institutions have problems in recruiting. We have some 
recruitment problems, but not as many as other institutions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Have you been targeted in any of 
the suits? 

MR. HAMLET: We're also in under the Armstrong and 
Coleman , but the last Coleman audit came out very well for us. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: But I mean, in any of the recent 
suits? 

MR . HAMLET : No . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What programs do you have that 
are pre-release to try to reduce recidivism? 

MR. HAMLET: Yes, we have a pre-release program. 
We have a parenting program also that we've had for many years. 

And currently we have a program for substance 
abuse, which was started at South Facility about a year ago, and 
we just initiated our second substance abuse program at North 
Facility. South Facility has 200 inmates attend that program, 
and North Facility, once it's up and running, will have 250 
inmates . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How long or intensive are your 
pre-release programs? 



MR. HAMLET: They're quite intensive. They're six- 
and-a-half hours a day in the pre-release program. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: For how long a period? 
4 MR. HAMLET: Up to three months. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In the response to questions, you 
have about 4,000 jobs for 7,000 inmates. How long are the 
waiting lists, or what can be done to try to get more people into 
them? 

MR. HAMLET: Well, over the last 10-12 years, 
during the recession, we took a lot of hits in staff. It'd be 
great if we'd get some of that staffing back so we could start 
some of those programs . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The last two years hasn't been a 
recession. It's been a boom. 

16 MR. HAMLET: It has, but we haven't received 

17 anything in the Department of Corrections along those lines. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Should have asked for it when it 
was there . 

I mean, you made requests through - 

MR. HAMLET: Budget Change Proposals. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You make them up through Presley, 
and Presley through Finance, and Finance to the Governor's 
Office? 

MR. HAMLET: Correct. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I don't know if this is an 



5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 



19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



appropriate question, Mr. Chairman, but we've had representatives 
of the Department here, and we've asked these questions relating 
to the telephones. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I just would like to know this 
appointee's views of that, and whether you think it's appropriate 
that the State of California's making money off of the ability of 
inmates to be able to carry on a conversation with members of 
their family, or whatever? 

MR. HAMLET: Yeah, I believe it is appropriate for 
us to do so. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: To make a profit? 

MR. HAMLET: To make a profit, and in turn to use 
it to offset some of our budget. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why? Why are you charging 
somebody that didn't commit a crime to make up your budget? The 
taxpayers are already paying. 

MR. HAMLET: Well, that may be true — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: No, it is true. 

MR. HAMLET: Okay, it is true, but I still feel 
it's appropriate for them to — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why? 

MR. HAMLET: Because we have services currently -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why is it appropriate for them to 
do it? Because somebody in their family committed a crime, they 
should be punished for that? 



? 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



MR. HAMLET: Well, if they hadn't committed the 
crime, they wouldn't be in there -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: No, no. It's the family, not the 
prisoner, who pays. 

MR. HAMLET: Sir, I told you, I believe in the 
policy. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: And I want to know why? A simple 
question you're not answering. 

MR. HAMLET: To the best of my knowledge, I am 
answering it, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Well, I don't think you are; all 
right? 

MR. HAMLET: Okay. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: You said you think it's right. I 
said, why? Because I think it's right. 

That ' s not an answer . 

MR. HAMLET: It's a policy of the Department -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I know it is. I'm asking your 
opinion, and I'm asking you to justify your opinion or explain 
it, not justify it. You don't have to justify anything to me. 

MR. HAMLET: Sir, again, I find it appropriate. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: And I'm asking you why? 

MR. HAMLET: Why not? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Can I tell you, this thing's 
being put over. You come back, maybe. 

Jeffrey Morales, Director of Transportation. 



Senators, alphabetical and seniority, Costa. 

SENATOR COSTA: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 
Members of the Committee. 

I'm here, along with my colleague, Senator Dunn, to 
recommend Jeff Morales for the post of Director of the Department 
of Transportation for the State of California. 

I have gotten an opportunity to work with 
Mr. Morales over the last year, but actually know from his 
involvement for the years he worked on the Hill, both in the 
United States Senate as well as in his other endeavors on 
transportation-related issues. He went from working for Senator 
Lautenberg and others on transportation issues, to Chicago, where 
he dealt with the difficult transportation issues of dealing with 
that transportation agency, and distinguished himself in terms of 
trying to improve that department. 

The Department of Transportation, Members of this 
Committee know, is probably one of the largest transportation 
agencies in the world. The responsibilities, the budget that 
goes with it, requires, I think, someone that not only has the 
expertise, but has the ability to have on-hands management in 
terms of making things happen. 

We know that if we're going to be successful in the 
21 st Century, once we get beyond this energy crisis, that 
investment in our transportation infrastructure is a key 
component. The Chairman of this Committee, Senator Burton, has 
worked hard in the last couple years to try to put together a 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



transportation initiative that will provide financing for that 
effort, and we've all committed to do that. I think this person 
could do the job in implementing the funding that, hopefully, we 
can provide to meet our needs . 

For those reasons, I support the Director. 

SENATOR DUNN: Thank you, Committee Members. I'm 
also here to express my complete support for Jeff Morales as 
Director of Caltrans. 

During his time in this position already, I've had 
an opportunity to work with him extensively, both as a Member of 
the Transportation Committee, and also on a number of 
transportation issues in Orange County. I've found Jeff not only 
to be extraordinarily knowledgeable on the issues of 
transportation in California, and the operation clearly of 
Caltrans, but probably more than anything else, I've found Jeff 
to be extraordinarily responsive to the concerns that I've 
brought to his attention. And not responsive in the sense of, 
"Yes, Joe, I'll quickly pass it on to a knowledgeable staff 
member." He remained personally involved and actually, at my 
request, has come to Orange County on several occasions to assist 
resolving local problems that we had in the transportation arena. 

I think his time in office already indicates what 
we can expect, and it's been extraordinary, and I support his 
nomination. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you very much. 

Director, we have your response, and if you'll just 



8 

give a brief opening statement, and we'll have some questions. 

MR. MORALES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members 
of the Committee. And I appreciate the opportunity to appear 
before you. It's a great honor to have been appointed by 
Governor Davis to take the responsibility as Director of the 
Department of Transportation. 

Voters in Alameda and Santa Clara Counties have 
overwhelmingly approved measures to fund transportation, and 
statewide, voters approved Proposition 35, which gives the state 
broad authority to outsource architectural and engineering 
services. Together, these actions sent a very loud, clear 
message that people want to see results. 

My job is to move this Department forward and in a 
direction that produces results and does so faster, more 
efficiently, and more cost-effectively. While there are many 
ways we're working to achieve this goal, I'd like to focus on 
three key areas of focus. 

First, we're working to improve the environmental 
process. Currently it takes too long, costs too much, and 
ironically, doesn't always produce the best environmental 
mitigation. Based on initial work with the agencies that we work 
with, I'm very encouraged that we can make major improvements. 

Second, we will utilize the flexibilities provided 
through Proposition 35. In so doing, we will not lay off 
employees . Our goal is to maintain a stable workforce to meet 
our core work, and to use outside resources to address peaks in 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



our workload and specialized work that we cannot do internally. 

The reality is that we have more than enough work 
to keep our internal workforce fully employed and take advantage 
of the expertise that the outside, the private sector, brings. 

Third, we're using the Congestion Relief Program as 
a way to find new ways of improving project delivery. We're 
making great progress toward this goal. In September, we 
received authority to allocate funding for those projects. By 
May, almost two- thirds of all of the projects in the program will 
have received approval of an application, and one-and-a-half of 
the $2 billion initially approved in the first year will have 
already been approved by the CTC. Tomorrow we break ground on 
the first major construction project in that program, right here 
in Sacramento. 

Mr. Chairman, we need to move forward in three 
places in this Department, as we go from an organization that is 
focused on building roads and bridges, to one that is managing a 
transportation system. We need a system that is more balanced, 
providing people with viable alternatives; more efficient, using 
technology, operating strategies and improvements to squeeze 
greater use out of existing and new capacity; and we need a 
system that is safer. 

And as we move forward, we face tremendous 
challenges. But with the tools that the Governor and the 
Legislature have given us, we have new opportunities to tackle 
these challenges. And I look forward to continuing the 



10 
improvements we're making and appreciate your consideration of my 
nomination . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

Do you have family with you? 

MR. MORALES: I do, sir. I have my wife Laurie, 
and my children, Kyle and Elisa, and my mother-in-law, Doris. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Tell me your kid wasn't named 
after Kyle Rote. 

[Laughter. ] 

MR. MORALES: I'm guessing you don't want a yes to 
that answer. 

[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR JOHNSON: You don't have to explain 
yourself . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: He must have been a hell of a 
guy. There's more children in this country named after him than 
anybody, I think, since Franklin Roosevelt. 

MR. MORALES: He was not. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Number 44. 

MR. MORALES: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I've got an easy one, then a 
tough one . 

How do they determine whether those diamond lanes 
are two people or three? That's the easy one. 

MR . MORALES : That ' s based on usage . And we have 
some thresholds that we look at in terms of what the usage is, 



11 

and we make adjustments. 

It's one area we're going to be a lot more flexible 
going forward, and looking at how the diamond lanes are used. 
4 CHAIRMAN BURTON: Because up north, they're 

basically, I think, three. And down south, a lot of times 
they're two. 

MR. MORALES: There 're only a few places where it's 
three, and we're looking at all of those. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's 1-80 from San Francisco to 
Sacramento . 

MR . MORALES : Correct . 

[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR JOHNSON: It just worked out that way. 

15 CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do you want to just briefly 

16 comment on the Bay Bridge, and say you think we can get out from 

17 under it? 

MR . MORALES : Yes . Our number one goal , and there 

was a Senate Select Committee on Bay Area Transportation hearing 
last week I testified at on this. Our goal is to move forward 
and get that project done. 

We are at a point now where, if we can resolve the 
last outstanding issues, we can get -- got to contract. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Cost? 

MR. MORALES: Cost primarily, yes, that is the 
major outstanding issue. There are some permitting issues as 
well . 



5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 



18 
19 
20 

21 

22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



12 

But we can go to contract this year and have the 
work underway this year. That is our goal in doing so. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The overrun is substantial; 
right? 

MR. MORALES: Yes, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How do you see financing that? 

MR. MORALES: There are two major sources of -- or 
two places of overrun, and we're proposing two solutions. 

One, using federal funds; federal formula funds 
that come to the state, approximately $550 million in those funds 
over the next several years, which we'll be getting to cover some 
of the overrun in the program. 

The balance, we're working with the region to look 
at how to address, because that overrun -- the majority of the 
overrun is coming on the east span of the Bay Bridge. And it is 
a different bridge than the one that was anticipated in SB 60 
when it was passed, and it's, as appropriate, was selected by the 
region to reflect the region's interests. And we're working with 
the region to come up with the best way to fund that . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The region being MTC? 

MR. MORALES: The MTC acting on behalf of the 
region, yes, sir. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: And they'll figure the best way 
to fund it will be to ask somebody else for the money? Is it 
coming out of their pot, or who knows? 

MR. MORALES: There are several proposals on the 



4 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



13 

table. Right now, we're working both with the committee and with 
the MTC to go back and look at the cost estimates, make sure 
all agree on what the numbers are, and then go forward. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Is there any way to, like, try to 
reduce the cost at all? 

MR. MORALES: That is part of what we're looking 
at. We have tried to -- we've gone through and looked at, but we 
think it's worth having an independent evaluation of that. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First, let me say that I've had the opportunity 
several months ago to meet with Director Morales, and I was very 
impressed with both his background, his knowledge, and certainly 
his command of a lot of detail . 

Nevertheless, sir, I have a number of questions. 
And this isn't necessarily in any way reflective of you, but it 
certainly is reflective of the apparent current status of the 
Department. Therefore, I'm very interested your thoughts and 
your reactions. 

First, just following up on Senator Burton's 
question, is it accurate to say that the major difference between 
the initial proposals with respect to the Bay Bridge and where we 
are today were considerations of aesthetics? Someone's idea of, 
this is a prettier bridge. 

MR. MORALES: It is — SB 60, when it was passed, 
put -- separated the bridges into two categories. Six of them we 



14 

had were retrofits, and we had control over the design and the 
construction . 

The seventh was the east span, and the MTC, acting 
on behalf of the region, was given the authority to select a 
design for that bridge. It has chosen a design which is 
certainly much more stylish than the one originally proposed. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Beauty's in the eye of the 
beholder . 

But what is the nature, and I understand that 
you're in the process of this, but you certainly ought to be able 
to give us some kind of a ballpark of the overrun. Are we 
talking double the cost that was originally contemplated? 

MR. MORALES: Yes. We released a report several 
weeks ago which outlined that. The bridge, total bridge cost is 
approximately double of what it was projected to be several years 
ago. 

I'll put some qualifications on that, though. The 
original estimates did not include cost escalation, inflation, or 
contingencies, which normally are included in any project, and 
certainly a project of that magnitude. So, it's not a completely 
direct comparison, but the cost is considerably higher than what 
was anticipated originally. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: And again, is it fair to say that 
aesthetics played a significant part in that? 

MR. MORALES: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Next question, what are you doing 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



15 

to ensure that all of the projects which are funded are actually- 
delivered? Can you give us some idea of where we are in terms of 
the percentages? 

MR. MORALES: We -- our delivery, we're continually 
working to improve it. But I will say, last year was a record 
year, in fact, for delivery: $2.8 billion worth of work went to 
contract in the last year. And in one month alone, we put more 
out to contract than 38 states do in an entire year. 

This year we're on a track for a similar level of 
delivery. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: What percentage of projects 
included in the STIP are going forward; do you know? 

MR. MORALES: We have -- 

SENATOR JOHNSON: We're told that we're at about 82 
percent, which means that like 18 percent are not. Is that not 
accurate? 

MR. MORALES: The total delivery is approximately 
96 percent, and figures -- and we've gone through these with the 
LAO to get some agreement on that, and we have agreement now -- 
the 82 percent figure refers to the percentage of projects that 
were programmed in that particular year that go forward. 

What happens during the course of a year is, in 
some cases, things happen that we couldn't anticipate, and a 
project gets delayed. 

What we do then is advance other projects to go 
forward, and so we pull some projects forward from the next year. 



16 

So, the equivalent is that we have a 96 percent 
delivery rate for the last year. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I'm not quite sure I understand 
that calculation. 

I mean, if there were projects that were 
contemplated to be completed in a given year, and it sounds like 
what you're saying is, yeah, that's probably right, that 18 
percent are not being -- 

MR. MORALES: Right. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: -- done, but you're substituting. 

MR. MORALES: Right. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: One from column A, and one from 
column B . 

MR. MORALES: Yes, and it's the reflection of, 
again, in the course of building a project, things may come up 
that can't be anticipated in the course of a year. 

And you're right, 82 percent of all the project 
programmed for the year go forward, and then we pull forward some 
that are anticipated for the next year as well . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: So then what happens? If we 
assume that it's 18 percent, are we going to catch up? Those 18 
percent, do they move to the head of the line? 

MR. MORALES: Yes. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: For the following year? 

MR. MORALES: Yes. 

The 18 percent does not imply that work has stopped 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



17 

on those. It means that we didn't reach the milestone that was 
intended. So, the projects are still moving forward; they just 
did not reach completion in that year. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: What's the fund balance in the 
State Highway Account? 

MR. MORALES: Fund balance is, I believe it's 
approximately 1.8 billion. I would have to check that figure. 
Somewhere in that range . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I'm told it's 2.3 billion, so I 
don't know if that's -- 

MR . MORALES : That ' s higher than - - 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's the price of the. 
transmission lines. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. MORALES: We can confirm that for you, 
certainly. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Well, it seems to me that 
whatever that amount, that is money that could be spent on 
projects and isn't, for whatever it's not being spent. 

I mean, would you agree that we ought to be putting 
a higher priority on, you know, if we've got that money, and 
we've got these projects in the pipeline, that we ought to be 
moving forward? 

MR. MORALES: Yes, absolutely. I mean, there's no 
higher priority than project delivery. That is what we do, and 
we're working on a number of things to improve our project 



18 
delivery. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I was pleased with your comments 
about Proposition 35. You believe that the implementation of 
Prop. 3 5 is going forward in -- 

MR. MORALES: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: -- timely fashion. 

I want to turn to the subject of vacancies, and I'm 
sure that this is a subject that you've already had some 
conversations about. 

We're told that there are some 1500 vacancies at 
Caltrans. It would seem to me that there might be some 
relationship between the number of vacancies and not being able 
to utilize all the funds that are available in the STIP projects, 
and in some cases falling behind. 

Could you comment on the vacancy rate and what's 
being done about that? And then, as a secondary question, we've 
seen memos that imply that at least some managers in Caltrans are 
playing a shell game, so that the funds are retained and you just 
never have the vacancies, the money returning to the state? 

MR. MORALES: Let me, if I could, answer in reverse 
order . 

Let me assure you on that point, contrary to what 
was alleged and reported, in some cases, the Department did not 
seek and did not obtain any funds for personal service -- seek 
personal service dollars and convert them or use them for other 
purposes, such as operating expenses. 



9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



19 

Any vacancies that we have, and any funds 
associated with those, come from the State Highway Account and 
return to them at the end of the fiscal year until appropriated 
again. 

The vacancy rate is right now, I just saw the most 
current numbers as of this morning, in fact, and we are virtually 
fully staffed right now. That is significantly ahead of where we 
were at the end of the calendar year, which is what some of the 
reports you saw were based on. 

We do have significant issues with getting 
vacancies filled. We're not alone in that. Technical positions, 
particularly engineers, are very hard to recruit and retain right 
now. It's a very competitive environment. We're recruiting 
nationally to bring people in, and we also have had significant 
waves of retirements in the last few years. So, we are taking 
longer than we would like in some cases to fill positions, but 
we're moving very aggressively to fill them. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: So, what is your estimate of, as 
of this morning, the number of vacancies at Caltrans? 

MR. MORALES: We have a -- there's a built-in four 
percent vacancy rate that is — 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Salary savings. 

MR. MORALES: -- salary savings; I'm glad you 
understand that, Senator, as opposed to me. 

There is a four percent vacancy rate, which 
accounts for lags in hiring, basically. 



20 

We are virtually -- we are at, I believe, the 
number there was 4.02 percent of vacancy rate right now. So, out 
of -- we have virtually no vacancies department -wide . Some 
departments, some parts of the Department, we have vacancies, but 
we are very close to fully staffed right now. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman I don't wish to 
belabor this. The information that we've seen would suggest that 
there's a substantially greater number. 

Are you familiar with Kelly Brooks? Kelly Brooks, 
the manager in the Caltrans Budget Office. 

MR. MORALES: Oh, yes, yes . 

SENATOR JOHNSON: And the individual responsible 
for a memo that's been discussed a good deal in the last couple 
of months. In this memo is outlined how Caltrans is to avoid the 
effect of unfilled positions, positions that go unfilled for six 
months. You haven't used it, so you lose it. And this memo 
explains the kind of a shell game that it says Caltrans routinely 
uses in order to avoid the effects of that law. 

Has this memo been brought to your attention? 

MR. MORALES: Yes, sir, it has. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Have you had a conversation with 
Kelly Brooks, and have you asked for an explanation? If the 
plain English reading of this is somehow not what was intended, 
what in the world was? 

MR. MORALES: We have spent a considerable amount 
of time looking at that issue and working with the Department of 



9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



21 

Finance and with the LAO also to make sure -- and with the State 
Controller's Office -- to make sure we all understand what's 
going on . 

We've made a number of changes and are continuing 
to make changes with Finance on our personnel control issues. 

But, the information provided in that, there was a 
considerable lag between the numbers reported there, and then the 
actual. And that's the discrepancy we're talking about here 
today. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: I started out by indicating that 
I met with you, been very impressed with your qualifications and 
your demeanor, and so on. And that I didn't in any sense hold 
you responsible for it. 

But I guess the question that I'm looking for an 
answer to is: If the plain meaning of this memo is to be taken, 
is that a source of concern to you? I mean, is the idea that the 
Caltrans bureaucracy is playing games with funding for positions, 
with no intention of filling the positions, and you rotate it in 
and out so the money stays there, and the positions go unfilled, 
is that of concern to you? 

MR. MORALES: Certainly. We should not and will 
not play games with the budget. And what we've been going 
through is understanding exactly what did and didn't happen in 
that . 

But absolutely, we should not be playing games. No 
state agency should be playing games with the budget. 



22 

Again, what we've found is, what has been happening 
is, in most cases, where we've had a difficult time filling 
positions, mostly again the technical engineering positions, 
there have been positions abolished and then restored later on. 
They were hard to fill positions. The funds would have 
disappeared, and they were abolished in order to make sure people 
in the pipeline could, in fact, fill them. 

But games is not what we should be doing, and I 
don't believe we are. And if there are any instances of that, 
we'll certainly correct it. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: All right. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I have something in my district. 
Senator Burton has a bridge. We have the 710, and I want to 
compliment you. 

The people in my district think that Caltrans 
actually did some good. They put an ad in the Bee , in the 
Sacramento Bee about what's happening with the 710 Freeway. I 



just wanted to mention that. 

My question is, though, we've talked about the 
STIP. And we've talked about whether or not SB 45 really does 
what we meant for it to do when many of us voted for it . 

Do you have any idea about that? Should the state 
play a role in regional transportation STIP, or should it 
continue to just focus primarily on the inter- regional needs? 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



23 

I hear a lot of that on the Transportation 
Committee, problems between what the state should be doing and 
what the regions should be doing in the STIP, and how we allocate 
funds . 

MR. MORALES: It has to be a collaborative effort. 
When we look at how people travel, they don't respect the 
jurisdictional boundaries of a regional transportation agency or 
a county. They travel where ever they have to go. And in many 
cases on a regular basis, commuting patterns cut across regions. 

And there is some concern that at least in some 
cases, the plans and the spending of the regions don't match up 
as well as they ought to. And that's something we're looking at, 
certainly, in terms of how we can work more closely with the 
regions to make sure we're getting a balanced system that works. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I think some regions need more 
help than others. They're constantly asking Caltrans to do 
things, and there is a way you can do that. They can borrow 
money from that one point -whatever million that you have and use 
that money, I hope. 

MR. MORALES: Yes. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Okay, one other question. 

We talk about energy constantly in the Capitol . Do 
you think Caltrans has a role in the energy crisis? 

MR. MORALES: We do. Let me tell you a few things 
we're doing specifically on that. 

First on the conservation front, we have gone very 



24 

aggressively on a conservation program, and across the Department 
have cut our energy usage by over 2 percent, which we're very, 
very pleased with. 

We're also moving forward on a number of 
initiatives, including replacing traffic signals, the old 
incandescent bulbs with LEDs, which cut usage by about 90 
percent, as we go forward. And we're doing that aggressively 
statewide . 

We're also working closely in terms of siting new 
facilities with granting permits as necessary, encroachment 
permits, for transmission lines, gas lines, whatever the case may 
be, to cross state highways. So, we're working very closely with 
others in state government to do that. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We've talked about the Bridge and some other things 
in Senator Karnette's district. I don't care about the Bridge at 
all, other than to make sure that the Chairman is happy. 

[Laughter . ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: If you had any water in your 
district, you'd be disturbing. 

[Laughter . ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: But I am concerned about the fact 
that the Governor has put together the Congestion Relief Program 
and increased the STIP from four to five years, and it's pushed 
some projects back. 



25 

And I have a project that has been, from our 
standpoint, a significant safety problem for a good many years, 
and that's Highway 138.' 

MR. MORALES: Yes, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: The commuting has increased 
between the population centers, and it's a two-lane road, built 
100 years ago. And the number of people killed every year on 
that highway is staggering. We have tried to get it designated 
as a safety project. 

I want to know how soon, or what your plans are for 
that program? 

MR. MORALES: Sure. 

And Senator, we've talked about that. And your 
views are very clearly known and appreciate on that . 

In 1999, you sponsored legislation making that a 
double -enforcement zone. And the last numbers I saw from the CHP 
said that as a result of things that we in cooperation with them 
and locals have done in the last few years, that the fatality 
rate is, in fact, down since that time significantly, by 60 
percent. It is still -- 

SENATOR KNIGHT: But certainly we have to 
understand that those were interim measures, Band-Aids, and they 
certainly were not — 

MR. MORALES: They are important, but they're not 
the end of the solution. 

We are working currently on a number of 



26 

improvements: to go to four lanes; to put in climbing lanes; 
passing lanes; do a number of things. 

We have some projects funded currently and 
underway, and a number of others that are in the planning stages. 
And we're working very closely with the local governments and 
with our district office there to move those projects forward. 

Senator Knight, I assure you, you have our 
commitment to dealing with that issue. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, we'll keep checking with you 
from time to time. 

MR. MORALES: Certainly. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

Just a couple of questions. I also have the 710 
that goes through my district. In fact, terminates there. And 
it's been a 3 -year struggle. 

Let me ask you, though, last month I met with about 
3 00 families in the El Cedeno area. These are, of course, 
renters . 

The accusation I hear against Cal trans is that you 
are an absentee landlord, which of course, taxes local police 
agencies to police the area in terms of drug trafficking, 
prostitution, et cetera. 

Can you address for me, what is the policy with 
respect to Caltrans in terms of maintaining appropriate housing 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



27 
standards, and just maintenance of the area when Cal trans does 
have its rental properties? How do you maintain it? 

And when these issues are surfaced, how do you 
address them? 

MR. MORALES: Right. 

That's a unique situation, in that we own several 
hundred homes in that area that are in a corridor that at least 
may be part of a freeway expansion. 

Issues there, we do regular maintenance inspections 
on the homes. And then, any time we're alerted to an issue, we 
go out and check it . 

And I can tell you, two weeks ago, I believe, we 
were notified of a problem with the roof in one home, and had an 
inspector out there within 45 minutes, and had the repair done. 

And because of some concerns that were raised as 
part of that , and the Lt . Governor heard some concerns and 
relayed them to me also, I actually had our staff go door-to-door 
to every home that we own in that area to check on the status, 
regardless of when it had last been maintained. 

But we are the landlord there, and we have the 
responsibility to act as the landlord and maintain those homes. 

SENATOR ROMERO: I'm pleased to hear that action, 
and we'll look forward to, again, if there are subsequent 
concerns, to hook you up with them. 

Secondly, let me ask you as well, what is 
California doing to prepare for the growth of trade, truck 



28 

shipments, as a result of NAFTA, with Mexico? 

MR . MORALES : We have on the border a number of 
specific improvements, both to existing facilities, and we're 
also working with both state and federal agencies to add some 
border crossings on the border. We're working on two additional 
crossings, as well as a number of road improvements that will 
help not only the truck traffic coming across, but traffic in the 
San Diego region down there. 

We have built state-of-the-art, and I believe they 
are more advanced than any other facility anywhere in the 
country, truck inspection facilities on our side of the border, 
so that every truck coming in is first visually inspected, and 
then, as necessary, is pulled in and physically inspected for 
safety purposes as it goes through. 

So, we're doing a number of things on the border to 
make sure that we're responding to the growth of traffic that 
we're seeing there. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: How does NAFTA impair your 
ability to stop these trucks on a safety basis? 

MR. MORALES: We — it does not. The concerns have 
been raised about safety of trucks. 

The inspection is primarily a CHP function. We 
uild the facility along the border to do it, and then provide 
any assistance. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do you know how they're doing? 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



29 

MR. MORALES: They are doing -- 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Or should we ask them? 

MR. MORALES: You should probably ask them, but we 
are working with them. But we have built the facilities to 
inspect the trucks. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support, briefly. 
Name, rank, and serial number. 

MR. MEYER: Mr. Chairman, Paul Meyer, representing 
CELSOC, the Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of 
California, in support. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Next. 

MR. TUTTLE: Mr. Chairman and Members, Marty Tuttle 
from SACOG, the regional planning agency here in Sacramento, in 
strong support . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

MR. ALEXANDER: Dennis Alexander, representing 
Professional Engineers in California Government. 

I'm not sure of my rank, but we're in wholehearted 
support of Mr . Morales . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's the first time CELSOC and 
PEG have been together in years. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. WATTS: Mr. Chairman and Members, Mark Watts, 
representing Transportation in California, a coalition of highway 
constructors and labor, in support. 

MR. HOEMANN: Mr. Chairman and Members, Warren 



30 
Hoemann, California Trucking Association, in support of the 
nominee . 

MR. ASSAGAI: Mel Assagai with the California 
Trucking Association and California Urban League Executives in 
support of the nominee. 

MR. RAMIREZ: Mr. Chairman, Frank Ramirez, 
representing the Native American Contractors Association in 
support, and also the American G.I. Forum in support. 

MR. GRASSO: Good afternoon. Tony Grasso, the 
Associated General Contractors of California, and we are pleased 
to support Jeff Morales' confirmation. 

MR. LEATHERS: Mr. Chairman and Members of the 
Committee, Pat Leathers on behalf of the Southern California Rock 
Products Association. Pleased to support the confirmation of 
Mr. Morales. 

MR. CREMINS: Tim Cremins, Operating Engineers, 
AFL-CIO, also State Bargaining Unit 12, the maintenance workers 
in Caltrans, in support. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Senator Burton, I have one 
complaint. I didn't see one woman. 

SENATOR ROMERO: I was thinking the same thing. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The guy's got two women 
supporters here; why do you need them out there? 

[Laughter . ] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Actually, what you ought to do is 
make a list of the people who testified, contact their employers, 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



31 

and ask why they haven't hired more women advocates in the 
Capitol . 

[Laughter. ] 

If you want to see me bury myself deeper, I would 
say that I'm sure that his daughter and his wife would come up in 
support; right? 

[Laughter.] 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in opposition. 

Moved by Senator Romero. Secretary, call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Romero Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Five to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations, Jeff. 

MR. MORALES: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Jeanne Woodford, Warden, San 



Quentin 



We have your statement. Why don't you just make a 



32 

brief opening statement, Warden, then we'll get to the questions. 

MS. WOODFORD: Again, my name is Jeanne Woodford. 
I started with the California Department of Corrections in 1978, 
following my graduation from Sonoma State College with a degree 
in criminal justice. 

I started as a correctional officer at San Quentin 
State Prison, and my entire career has been at San Quentin State 
Prison, with the exception of about six months that I've spent in 
Headquarters . 

I have promoted up through the Department, holding 
a variety of assignments. And more importantly, I have managed 
different missions while at San Quentin, having worked with male 
offenders at Level I, Level II, Level IV, Reception Center, and 
condemned inmates . 

And I will answer any questions you have for me. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Why don't you comment on the 
telephone situation? 

MS. WOODFORD: Well, first I'd like to say that the 
Department of Corrections receives no money from the telephone 
issue. It's managed by the Department of General Services. 

My personal viewpoint on that topic is that we 
shouldn't be charging the families of inmates. 

But I do caution, because I am aware that some 
counties do utilize that money. For example, I know Alameda 
County utilizes that money to fund their pre-release programs. 

So, in looking at that issue, some of the counties 



4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



33 
would have to look at other ways to fund those kinds of - 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: The counties don't get this. The 
counties would fund it from the county jail funds. 

Would they get it? 

MS. WOODFORD: They also get ten percent at the 
county level . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Right, but just talking on the 
prison thing, that money goes back in the general fund? 

MS. WOODFORD: To the general fund. But I know 
some counties use that money differently. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's actually for their Board 
of Supervisors. Did we get a commitment from Barry to look at 
it? All right. 

Just one question. You have, which I happen to 
know because San Quentin's in the district I represent, there is 
really, I think, better than most institutions, a record of 
having volunteers to work in the prison to, you know, do 
something with the prisoners. 

How do you accomplish that? I mean, I know that 
was going on before you were Warden. 

MS. WOODFORD: Right. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: What's the magic? The magic of 
Marin, or what? 

MS. WOODFORD: I really do believe that there's 
just a tradition of the surrounding counties. It's not only 
Marin but all the counties around us. 



34 

I think it's also, our staff attract many- 
volunteers. We have chaplains like Earl Smith, who's out there 
in the community, bringing volunteers in. Our teachers are very 
active in bringing volunteers in. Many of our staff are out in 
the community, talking about San Quentin and the programs we 
offer . 

And from being out in the community and speaking to 
different groups, we receive many people interested in coming in 
and volunteering their time. 

We're very fortunate. Last year, we had over 2,000 
volunteers come into the prison. And we have 3 00 that come in 
who are very committed and come in routinely. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Do they still have the Visitor's 
House? What's the name of it? 

MS. WOODFORD: We have a Visitor's Center, but the 
contract is no longer held by the House. It's now held by 
Friends Outside. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Who held it before? 

MS. WOODFORD: It was Center Force. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes. 

MS. WOODFORD: Center Force is still there, and 
they're still involved in the prison. They provide our peer 
interactive training for our health education programs, our HIV 
services, and our other health education services are provided by 
Center Force. 

And they also work with visitors, but they don't 



35 
have the contract for the Visitor's Center. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Was that a contract that was just 

3 put out to bid or what? 

4 MS. WOODFORD: It was put out to bid about a year 
ago and was given to Friends Outside. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Johnson. 

SENATOR JOHNSON: No questions. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I know you have a serious 
problem at San Quentin, and I thought you might want to comment 
on that . 

MS. WOODFORD: Well, we have three missions at San 
Quention: Reception Center, and our intake is 100 inmates a day; 
and a Level II mission, which is a mission that we're very well- 

16 suited for, and those are inmates who'll be returning to parole, 

17 and we're able to provide many services because of our volunteers 
and the committed staff at San Quentin. 

But we also have the mission of housing the 
condemned, and the condemned population is up to 571 inmates. We 
receive them at the rate of 3 a month. And so, that presents two 
problems , and the problems are one that ' s more immediate . 

In the condemned population, they're classified 
into two groups: Grade As, and those are the inmates who are 
very conforming in prison; and Grade Bs, and those are inmates 
who are gang members, and more recently have had a lot of 
violence towards staff in the forms of spearings, gassings, and 



6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 



19 
20 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



36 

attempted -- cutting out of a yard and attempting to take over 
the Adjustment Center. 

The more immediate problem is what to do with this 
very high-risk, dangerous group of inmates. 

The more long-term problem for the condemned is 
where to house them, because by 2003, we will have outgrown - we 
will have no more room in the three housing units that they're 
currently housed in. 

In addition to just their housing, we have other 
cells we can put them in, but there are program issues, such as: 
yard, where will they go to yard; how will we get them to a SHU 
law library; the condemned visiting room is very crowded, where 
will we expand for visiting. 

So, the immediate issue, which is the Nation's 
bill, is moving some of the Grade Bs from San Quentin to a more 
secure environment because of our physical plant . We have open- 
cell fronts, which makes our staff more vulnerable. 

The more long-term issue is what to do with the 
condemned as their numbers grow. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I was just curious and would like 
to go back to the telephone issue. 

You indicated that there were various organizations 
that utilized those funds and were dependent on those funds, and 
that seemed to be justification for the tax, if you will, and 



37 
independent of who it was on. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: That's the county, not the state. 

MS. WOODFORD: Yes. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Well, I understand. But whomever 
it was, the indication was that that's part of the justification 
for collecting those monies, because somebody was dependent on 
them. 

I find that, you know, a little amazing that that's 
the justification for a tax. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: They're all taxes. 

MS. WOODFORD: Well, my comment to that is that at 
the state level, that is not the case. It goes into the general 
fund. 

I only mentioned the county issue, which really 
isn't my issue, because I know that some counties are dependent 
upon that to provide services to those inmates that they' re 
releasing, which is an important issue. And I'd want to be sure 
that they had some other way of funding pre-release programs. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: If anything happened with this, 
it wouldn't affect the county jails. 

MS. WOODFORD: No, that's true. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: But I agree with the Senator. 
That's justification for all those confiscatory taxes. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Again I have two questions. 



38 

If you can describe for us the steps that you are 
taking to avoid gang or race-related violence incidents. What 
are you doing to avoid these? 

And secondly, if you can, describe for us your 
academic, your educational programs that are available there for 
inmates? 

MS . WOODFORD : Okay . 

I actually think that the answer to the first 
question is included in the answer to the second question, so I'd 
like to start with that. 

We run the state's only college program, and we do 
that at no expense to the taxpayers, utilizing volunteer 
professors from primarily University of California, Berkeley. 
And inmates at San Quentin are able to achieve their A. A. degree, 
and we're in the process of expanding that to a B.A. degree. 

And we do that because public protection and public 
safety is our number one priority. 

SENATOR ROMERO: And can I just ask, who are you 
working with to expand it to the B.A. degree? 

MS. WOODFORD: St. Mary's College is interested in 
assisting us with that. In fact, I'll be meeting with some 
people from St. Mary's and from U.C. Berkeley next week on that 
issue. So, we're talking about how we can expand those services. 

But education really is the answer to reducing 
recidivism. And education, you know, reading, writing, and 
' rithmetic is important, but education beyond that. We recognize 



39 
that , and that ' s why we bring in so many programs , such as 
Parenting Program and our Alternative to Violence Program, which 

3 goes back to your first question. 

4 We identify programs and bring them into the prison 
to try to teach inmates different ways of dealing with their 
issues. Alternative to Violence is one of those programs. Man 
Alive is another program that we have at San Quentin. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Are there policies of physical 
separation based on membership in certain organizations or race? 
Can you describe those? 

The programs, I applaud your efforts. I 
congratulate you, and I'd like to learn more about the expansion 
to the B.A. program, and let's move forward. 

15 But in the meantime, somebody comes in. There are 

16 gang, race-related incidents. 

17 How do you manage? Is there physical separation? 
If you can, describe that. 

MS. WOODFORD: Well, when — if you're talking 
about an inmate that comes into the Reception Center, yes, we do 
--we have to do physical separation because of the physical plan 
of San Quentin. We have one main yard, then we have a couple of 
small yards that the Reception Center can use. 

So, if we have inmates that are compatible, we're 
able to put them into that environment. If they're not, at our 
facility we have to place them into Ag. Seg. and transfer them to 
a facility where they can do their time. 



5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 



18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



40 

But the issue of gang violence for the Department 
is a real problem. And we are attempting to address it as we 
have gone forward with our requests for the Violence Control 
Program Department -wide, which does not so much impact San 
Quentin as it does other prisons that are having more problems 
with gang violence. 

As a Level II general population, I don't have the 
gang violence issues that our Level IVs do. But being aware of 
our problems Department -wide, the Violence Control Program is 
designed to do that. 

Because -- and I was fortunate enough to start with 
the Department of Corrections right at the end of the 
indeterminate sentencing law. Under the indeterminate sentencing 
laws, inmates came in with a motivation to be involved in 
programs. And that motivation was, you had to convince the Adult 
Authority that you were ready to parole. So, they came in to 
participate and to convince people of their readiness. 

When we went to the determinate sentencing law, we 
lost that sort of hammer that we had over people to be involved. 
And that's really when violence began to escalate. 

And we studied it from many different perspectives, 
and looked at other states. And the Violence Control Program 
seems to be the way to go to address this issue with the 
determinate sentencing law. 

I hope that answers your question. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: In other words, under 



3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 



41 
indeterminate sentence, if they behave, they have a shot at 
getting out. If they didn't, they were in longer. 

MS. WOODFORD: Uh-huh. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: So, under determinate sentence, 
they could be very good and not get out until it's time to get 
out . 

So what would be a Violence Control Program under 
determinate sentencing? Just keep separating people that don't 
like each other or what? 

MS. WOODFORD: No, under the Violence Control 
Program, you have a traditional general population, and that is 
made up with all the services that we provide. And inmates have 
to be involved in program. 

And if you're not involved in programs, if you're 
not going to work, not going to school, if you're not going to 
AA, if you're not doing all of the things that make you ready for 
parole, then you would end up in a nontraditional general 
population with less privileges. So, there's some incentive to 
be involved . 

For many years, we haven't set very high standards 
for our inmates. I mean, you come in, and you, if you go to 
work, and if you didn't pick up disciplinaries, you went home a 
little bit sooner. And if you didn't do any of that, you went 
home a little bit later. 

But under the indeterminate sentencing law, when 
inmates arrived, they were given actually a prescription of what 



42 

they had to do. You had to go to AA; you had to get involved in 
school; you had to go to conflict resolution. 

So, we're attempting, through the Violence Control 
Program, to return to much of that. And I think it's a very good 
thing for the state. I think it will assist us in reducing 
recidivism, because we have found with some of our drug programs 
that even when you make people go to those programs, they don't 
volunteer, they still benefit, and recidivism is reduced. And it 
really is opening up possibilities to people. And you have to 
get them there before you can do that. 

So, I think we're headed in the right direction. 
I'm very excited about it and happy to be a part of this time in 
Corrections . 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Did you bring any family with 



you' 



Woodford. 



MS. WOODFORD: I brought my husband with me, Eric 



CHAIRMAN BURTON: Witnesses in support? 

MR. MABRY: Sir, I'm going to take a seat, and I'll 
explain my reasons for that . 

I was watching the group before me come in, and 
they all sort of bent over and spoke. And working in prisons for 
23 years at a place like San Quentin, that could be dangerous. 

[Laughter . ] 

MR. MABRY: Chairman Burton and Rules Committee 
Members, my name is Roy Mabry. I'm the State President for the 



43 

Association of Black Correctional Workers. 

I'm here today on behalf of our membership, giving 
complete support for Warden Woodford. 

And I'd like to welcome Gloria Romero, our latest, 
newest addition to the Rules Committee. 

And I've toured San Quentin. I've actually visited 
every single shift on several occasions. 

And the one thing I'm proud about is the fact that 
this Warden has worked her way to the position she's here being 
confirmed for today, hopefully, and every classification. And 
that's a rarity, to have a Warden run the prison that's got the 
perception of being the most notorious prison in the country. 
For a female taking the lead at that prison, I think that's a 
great, great thing for the State of California. 

And with that, Ms. Woodford, I'd like to say 
congratulations, and I'll just take a hug from you. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Next. 

MS. HILL: Good afternoon. My name is Elaine Hill. 
I am a nurse out of California State Prison, Sacramento, but I'm 
here today as a representative of the Correctional Institutions 
Committee for CSEA. 

CSEA supports the confirmation of Ms. Woodford. 
The Correctional Committee met with Ms. Woodford and the 
leadership of San Quentin, and she made a commitment to meet with 
the Union on a regular basis and to continue to try to open the 
lines of communication. She has agreed to notify CSEA when 



44 

issues arise that affect our members, have open forums with rank 
and file, regularly scheduled joint labor-management meetings 
between administration and/or the Warden. 

And Ms. Woodford has requested retention and 
recruitment for all employees at San Quentin. She also requested 
the bridge tolls be waived for state employees, and of course, 
CSEA is very much in support of those. 

So yes, we think she would be very good. 

MS. WOODFORD: Thank you. I appreciate that. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Next, sir. 

MR . JONES : My name ' s Anthony Jones . I'm the 
Chapter President for the California Correctional Peace Officers 
Association at San Quentin. 

I have worked under three wardens, and I must say 
that Jeanne Woodford has proven to have the intestinal fortitude 
and the ability to bridge the gaps that the other two wardens 
that I for didn't. 

I'm in my third term as Chapter President there. 
I ' ve got to say that labor relations has improved tremendously 
since Ms. Woodford has taken over. We used to lead the state in 
everything: adverse actions; SPBs; grievances. I think I filed 
4 00 grievances in a month between me and my vice president under 
another warden. 

I've got to say that this year, I haven't filed one 
grievance. We've been able to establish a labor relations at San 
Quentin to where we deal with the IFRs, issues, facts, and 



45 
remedies. We finally have somebody at the helm that is willing 
to open her ears up and listen to the rank and file, because 
that's where she came from. And she understands us. 

We don't get -- you know, we don't see eye-to-eye 
on everything, but if we did, I wouldn't respect her. 

And I think she would be -- I'm asking for a 
unanimous Ayes from all this Committee for her appointment to 
Warden at San Quentin. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

Next. 

MR. CRITTENDON: I'm Vernell Crit tendon. I'm a 25- 
year employee at San Quentin State Prison. 

I've been fortunate enough to work with Jeanne 
Woodford as a correctional officer and watch her all the way 
through her promotions, all the way up to Warden of San Quentin. 

I've also had an opportunity to talk to a large 
number of our employees, somewhere around 1550 employees at San 
Quentin. And I think easily 1,000 of them know me by name or by 
face, and we've discussed issues over the time that they've been 
employed there. And all of them that I'm aware of have all sent 
their support on behalf of Jeanne Woodford's confirmation. 

Many of them who could not attend today asked me to 
make sure that we did say that we all at San Quentin are very 
proud of her, and we believe that she should be confirmed as our 
Warden . 

Thanks . 



46 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Did you work with my brother? 

MR. CRITTENDON: Your brother? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Yes. 

MR. CRITTENDON: Unfortunately, I'm too young. I 
started in 1976. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: I think he left in '80; didn't 
he? 

MR. CRITTENDON: Did he? 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: School teacher. 

MR. CRITTENDON: Yeah. I thought it was before 
then he left. '80, no, I missed him. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Thank you. 

Any opposition? 

I'll make the motion for approval. Call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Karnette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Romero Aye. Senator Johnson. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Johnson Aye. Senator Burton. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Burton Aye. Five to zero. 

CHAIRMAN BURTON: Congratulations. 



47 

MS. WOODFORD: Thank you so much. 
[Thereupon this portion 
of the Rules Committee 
hearing terminated at 
approximately 2:50 p.m.] 
--00O00— 



48 



CERT I F I GATE OF SHORT H AND REPORTER 

I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
transcribed verbatim by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or attorney 
for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way interested 
in the outcome of said hearing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 
.^S day of /MSTtjs' , 2001. 



T 




EVELYN J.^fZAK/J 



£- 



Shorthand Reporter 



t? 



STATEMENT 

OF 

RALPH H. WEBB 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

INTERSTATE 5 CONSORTIUM CITIES JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY 

LOS ANGELES/ORANGE COUNTIES 

TO THE 

RULES COMMITTEE 

CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE 

ON 
THE CONFIRMATION OF JEFF MORALES, DIRECTOR OF CALTRAINS 

APRIL 25, 2001 



I am Ralph H. Webb, Executive Director for the Interstate 5 Consortium Cities Joint 
Powers Authority. On behalf of the 1-5 Joint Powers Authority, the City of Norwalk (the 
lead agency for the 1-5 JPA), and Norwalk Councilman Rudy Bermudez, I appreciate the 
opportunity to appear in support of confirmation of Jeff Morales as Director of Caltrans. 

The story of the 1-5 JPA and the 1-5 corridor from State Route 91 to the 1-710 is one of 
partnership with Caltrans, the development of consensus among the transportation 
authorities as well as in the 1-5 corridor communities, and the development of good 
transportation planning and public policy. The results of this experience demonstrate the 
need for Caltrans leadership that is committed to partnering, development of good 
transportation public policy, and the timely delivery of improvements to our 
transportation systems. 

The 1-5 JPA represents the cities of Commerce, Downey, Santa Fe Springs, Norwalk, La 
Mirada, and Buena Park in the 20-mile 1-5 corridor from State Route 91/1-5 to the I-5/I- 
710 interchange. The JPA cities have a combined population of approximately 375,000. 

The 1-5 JPA was established in 1991 over concern that plans for significantly widening 
Interstate 5 would have significant, adverse social and economic impacts on 1-5 corridor 
communities. The corridor is fully developed with much of the corridor's economic base 
located adjacent to the freeway. Significant widening would result in the relocation of 
businesses outside the 1-5 corridor and the loss of jobs and tax base those businesses 
represent. Additionally, widening would result in significant disruption to the many 
residential neighborhoods that abut the 1-5. 

1-5 improvements are being completed in Orange County. Those improvements, 
generally a 10 lane facility with four general purpose lanes and one HOV lane in each 
direction, will transition to the existing 6 lane facility which exists within the 1-5 JPA's 
jurisdiction. Once completed, these improvements will exacerbate the existing congested 
conditions on the 1-5 and in the adjacent communities. 



50 



'gnizing the existence of congestion on the 1-5 and in the adjacent 

1-2 JPA has argued that widening Interstate 5 alone will not 

ress the 1-5 corridor traffic problems. A 26-lane freeway would be 

.. to insure free flowing traffic Only a multimodal, intennodal solution can 

address the problems while protecting the mterests of the corridor communities. The 1-5 

.'PA has promoted this strategy since 1991. The strategy canno: be implemented without 

a partnership of Caltrans, other transportation authorities, and the 1-5 JPA. 

A Nhior L"\es*.rner.! Study was completed in 1998. Out of the 1-5 MIS was developed a 
localh preferred alternative approved by Caltrans, SCAG, the Los Angeles County 
Metiopoliiar. Transportation Authority, the Orange County Transportation Authority, the 
I N JPA and the six cities represented by the 1-5 JPA. The $2 billion 1-5 preferred 
alternative is a multi-modal, intermodal alternative that calls for improvements to the 1-5 
matching the 1-5 configuration in Orange County as wells as a host of Transportation 
System Management and Transportation Demand Management improvements. 

The State Traffic Congestion Relief Program is providing funding for the environmental 
review and design of 1-5 improvements from the I-5/SR 91 to the I-5/I-710 interchange. 
The en\ ironmental review has begun. The 1-5 project will break ground in 2004. 

The 1-5 JPA has partnered with Caltrans and other transportation authorities in planning 
the future of the 1-5 corridor. The 1-5 JPA's participation has included funding for the 1-5 
MIS, other 1-5 studies, and the implementation of some Transportation System 
Management improvements. The partnership has culminated with the 1-5 MIS and locally 
preferred alternative, the development of consensus for J-5 improvements, and the 
funding of transportation system management improvements in the 1-5 corridor. 

The continuation of this unique partnership is imperative to insure the timely, successful 
implementation of this important improvement to the 1-5 comdor transportation network. 
We are looking forward to the confirmation of Mr. Morales as the Director of Caltrans, as 
we have developed an effective working relationship with him in regards to this project 
and would like it to continue. 

Thank vou. 



424-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 424-R when ordering. 



LSOQ 
tool 



^HEARING 

SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
MAY 2 I 2001 

SAN FRANCISCO 
p UBL(C LIBRARY 




STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 

MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2001 
1:34 P.M. 



425- R 



SENATE RULES COMMITTEE 
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 



HEARING 



STATE CAPITOL 

ROOM 3191 

SACRAMENTO , CAL I FORN I A 



MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2001 
1:34 P.M. 



Reported by: 



Evelyn J. Mizak 
Shorthand Reporter 



11 



APPEARANCES 
MEMBERS PRESENT 
SENATOR BETTY KARNETTE 
SENATOR WILLIAM KNIGHT, Acting Chair 
SENATOR GLORIA ROMERO 

MEMBERS ABSENT 
SENATOR JOHN BURTON, Chair 
SENATOR ROSS JOHNSON, Vice Chair 

STAFF PRESENT 
GREG SCHMIDT, Executive Officer 
PAT WEBB, Committee Secretary 

NETTIE SABELHAUS, Consultant on Governor's Appointments 
SUSIE SWATT, Consultant to SENATOR JOHNSON 
TIM SHELLEY, Consultant to SENATOR KARNETTE 
CHRIS BURNS, Consultant to SENATOR KNIGHT 

ALSO PRESENT 

GENEVIEVE A. SHIROMA, Member 
Agricultural Labor Relations Board 

SENATOR DEBORAH ORTIZ 

GEORGE GOMES 

California Farm Bureau Federation 

NORMA A. TURNER, General Counsel 
Agricultural Labor Relations Board 

ROY GABRIEL 

California Farm Bureau Federation 

MELINDA G. WILSON, Chief Deputy Director 
Rehabilitation Department 



Ill 
INDEX 

Page 
Proceedings 1 

Governor ' s Appointees : 

GENEVIEVE A. SHIROMA, Member 

Agricultural Labor Relations Board 1 

Introduction and Support by 

SENATOR DEBORAH ORTIZ 1 

Background and Experience 1 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Use of Labor Contractors Affecting 

Ability to Enforce Act 4 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Biggest Issue Facing Board 5 

Questions by SENATOR ROMERO re: 

Complications Arising Out of Use of 

Farm Labor Contractors 6 

Current Status of Labor Conditions in 

California 8 

Motion to Confirm 8 

Witness in Support: 

GEORGE GOMES 

California Farm Bureau 8 

Committee Action 9 

NORMA A. TURNER, General Counsel 

Agricultural Labor Relations Board 9 

Background and Experience 10 



IV 



Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Adequacy of Current Staffing 11 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Access Rule 13 

Questions by SENATOR ROMERO re: 

Difficulties in Enforcing Act with 

Labor Contractors 14 

Witness in Support: 

ROY GABRIEL 

California Farm Bureau 16 

Motion to Confirm 17 

Committee Action 18 

MELINDA G. WILSON, Chief Deputy Director 

Department of Rehabilitation 18 

Background and Experience 18 

Questions by SENATOR KNIGHT re: 

Recruiting and Retaining 

Qualified Staff 20 

Percentage of Current Staffing 20 

Department's Ability to Manage 

Budget and Analyze Data 21 

High Unemployment in Community of 

Blind and Visually Impaired 23 

Questions by SENATOR KARNETTE re: 

Problems with Vending Machines at 

Ironwood State Prison 25 

Programs for Aging Disabled 26 



V 



Questions by SENATOR ROMERO re: 

State Agency Responsible for 

Monitoring ADA Compliance 27 

Motion to Confirm 2 9 

Committee Action 2 9 

Termination of Proceedings 29 

Certificate of Reporter 30 

Attachments : 

Letter in Support of GENEVIEVE SHIROMA 

From: United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO 31 

Letter in Support of NORMA TURNER 

From: United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO 32 



P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 
--00O00-- 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Genevieve Shiroma, Member, 
Agricultural Labor Relations Board. 

SENATOR ORTIZ: Might I introduce? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: You may, Senator Ortiz. 

SENATOR ORTIZ: Mr. Chair and Members, it's an 
honor here to introduce Genevieve Shiroma, for whom I 
respectfully request reappointment by this Committee to the Ag. 
Labor Relations Board. 

Ms. Shiroma, as you know, has been serving as a 
Board of Directors of the SMUD Board as well as the Chair of the 
ALRB. She's worked for 20 years as a California Air Resources 
Board engineer. 

She is the Governor's appointee. I believe she's 
represented the complex issues before the Ag. Labor Relations 
Board in a way that she's balanced the interests of the employer 
as well as the workers. And she is in fact the daughter of a 
retired farmworker. 

I think she's been an asset to this 
administration, and I would respectfully request favorable 
consideration of this Board for her reappointment. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you, Senator Ortiz. 

Would you care to make a statement? 

MS. SHIROMA: Yes, thank you, Chairman Knight. 

It's a pleasure to be with you today, Chairman 
Knight and Members of the Rules Committee, Executive Director. 
I am honored to have the opportunity to appear before you 



1 today. 

I would like to introduce a couple members of my 
family. My husband, Michael Abbott is here, and also my sister, 
4 Amy Shiroma. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 
6 MS. SHIROMA: Also with me today is another ALRB 

Board Member, Gloria Barrios. 

I have a brief statement. I last appeared before 
you for confirmation in August of 1999, when I was appointed to 
fill the remainder of a term on the Board. At that time, we 
discussed short and long term goals: to issue fair and timely 

12 decisions on elections and unfair labor practice charges, to 

13 increase outreach, to meet with stakeholders, to assess our 

14 resources and our efficiency. 

15 I'm happy to report that since then, we met each 

16 of these goals, despite limited resources, and have developed 

17 new goals as a result of completing a needs assessment. 

18 Last year the Senate included budget language 

19 requiring us to conduct such a needs assessment. We were asked 
to address our current outreach in education efforts, the ease 

21 with which farmworker and grower communities can reach our 

22 services, any workload changes resulting from changes in the 

23 worker populations or industry practices, our ability to monitc 

24 compliance and process unfair labor practice charges, and our 

25 future needs. There was a lot to it. 

26 We went on the road. We did a lot of 

27 investigations. We completed this assessment on time and 

28 submitted our report to you, to the Joint Legislative Budget 



Committee, in January. 

Over all, we found that, in fact, there is a new 
generation of farmworkers which is largely unaware of our law 
and its protections. We found these same farmworkers often have 
little ability or means to use the ALRB and our processes. As 
one farmworker said to us, if you don't know your rights, it's 
as though you have no rights. 

We concluded we need additional resources to 
address these deficiencies. We therefore submitted a Finance 
letter last month to the Legislature, requesting an increase in 
staffing and outreach funding. 

I'm pleased to share with you that last week, 
Senator Byron Sher's Budget Committee unanimously approved our 
request. We go before the Assembly next week. 

In conclusion, I am fully committed to this very 
important law and to the stability of the Agricultural Labor 
Relations Board. I am fully committed to meeting the 
expectation of the worker and the employer alike, that the law 
is enforced and that the process is fair and timely. 

In California, we have between 800,000 and 
900,000 farmworkers employed by 35,000 thousand employers. 
They are essential. They are skilled. They work hard. They 
have rights under our law. 

We have 25 years of experience. We have 25 years 
of case law. We have committed staff. We have a committed and 
engaged Board and General Counsel. 

I would be honored to have the opportunity to 
continue to be a part of this very important effort. I 



™T 



respectfully request your confirmation of my appointment as a 
Board Member to the Agricultural Labor Relations Board. 

Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any 
questions you may have. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you very much. 

You know, since the Act, the nature of employment 
practices has changed. We now have contractors who provide 
labor to a lot of the farmers. 

Has that changed your ability to enforce the Act 
at all? 

MS. SHIROMA: It has insofar as under our Act, 
from the very beginning, the employer is liable for the 
requirements of our Act. 

In hiring a farm labor contractor, it creates a 
second layer that we must go through to discover who, in fact, 
is the employer. So, for us, that's a challenge as far as the 
farmworker, the supervisor, where there's a farm labor 
contractor, and ultimately who is the employer. For us, it is 
the investigation that, perhaps, takes a little extra long for 
us to find out who is the actual employer. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Does that then make it more 
difficult for you to deal with the employers, the farmers? 

MS. SHIROMA: It can, because a farm labor 
contractor may take a group of employees to one farm on one day, 
perhaps to another farm on another day. So, for us, it's a 
matter of being able to track through to find the employer. 

But ultimately, once we do find the employer, 
then all of our protections are there. 









SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Any questions from Senator Karnette? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: You mentioned that the concern 
with the new farmworkers coming in, they don't know their 
rights . 

Do you think that's the major issue facing ALRB 
right now, is getting information out to the farmworkers 
themselves? Is that the biggest issue facing you? 

MS. SHIROMA: I would say it's one of the issues 
facing us. 

We also -- and in terms of education, we hope to 
have both prevention for both the employer and for the employee. 

You'll probably hear later from our General 
Counsel that another challenge that we have is in terms of 
looking at becoming more efficient in how we process unfair 
labor practice charges. There's the old saying that justice 
delayed is justice denied. So, we are looking at utilizing 
tools so we can expedite that. 

Farmworker comes in. We're able to investigate 
quickly, determine whether there's merit or not. If there is, 
go to complaint, go through the regular court procedure. That's 
also a challenge for us, and hence, part of our request for 
additional staffing. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: And if you get the additional 
staffing, those will be two things you'd work on? 

MS. SHIROMA: Yes, ma'am. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: You indicated, justice delayed 



justice denied. I thought the defense attorneys, that was 
their mantra. 

[Laughter. ] 
A MS. SHIROMA: I can't comment on that, sir. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Senator Romero. 
6 SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

Of course, welcome before the Committee. You 
have some impeccable credentials and very strong letters of 
9 reference. 

10 I'd like to ask a question, actually a follow-up 

11 on what the Senator previously asked of you. 

12 Last year, I did carry a bill which dealt with 
what I believed to be a real weakness and a side effect of the 
increase of farm labor contractors, and what I believe does 

15 contribute to abuse in the fields. 

16 I'd like to ask you if you can expand on the 
question that the Senator did ask of you in terms of the 

18 complications that do arise in California and with the ALRB in 

19 terms of enforcing rights and protections for farmworkers with 
2C the increased use of farm labor contractors system, which I 

21 believe is a broken system in California. 

22 I'd like to hear your views on this. 

23 Secondly, if you can characterize what you 

24 believe to be the status, the state, the condition, of labor 
relations in California. Again, we've seen some real atrocitie 

26 in the field. And yet, we've begun to see an increase in some 

27 unionizing victories in California. 

28 So, if you can follow-up and expand on the 



question the Senator asked, and then if you can tell me what you 
believe your overall view to be of labor relations in California 
today. 

MS. SHIROMA: Okay. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: In 25 words or less. 

MS. SHIROMA: Yes, sir. 

The Act which I oversee, implement, enforce, 
makes very clear that in fact it is the employer who is 
responsible, liable, for unfair labor practice charges. 

The increased use of farm labor contractors has 
added a more complicating difficult dimension our investigations 
simply because when a farmworker walks in the door, who doesn't 
speak English, who's trying to identify who the alleged 
perpetrator is, then our staff -- it may be, well, it's the 
fellow with the cap that says, you know, ABC Farms. 

Then it ' s a matter of having to go through that 
investigation, and finding out that ABC Farms is actually a farm 
labor contractor. Where was that farmworker on the day that the 
incident occurred? Then following through to find out who the 
employer is. 

I also understand that in today's agricultural 
world, much of the farming community relies on farm labor 
contractors in order to have a steady and reliable workforce. 
But for us, it is that investigation which complicates it for 
us . 

But we have the strength of the law, which 
ultimately says that there is a liable entity there for us. So, 
that's the key thing for us. 



8 






3 

4 

5 
6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 



Now, in terms of overall labor relations, I would 
say that probably with any industry out there, any worker, 
employee-employer effort out there, that, by and large, we have 
employers and employees who have a stable environment. But then 
there is always that smaller percentage, whatever it may be, 
where there are difficulties. 

I would hope that under my Board, with my new 
Board members, the new General Counsel, that what we are doing 
for farmworkers under collective bargaining is, we are providing 
an environment that is respected, that is viewed as fair. I 
think we have a track record now, after two years, to show that, 
in fact, we have that point of view, and that will be a 
stabilizing force. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Any other questions from the 
Committee? Do I have a motion? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move the confirmation. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: It's been moved. Secretary, 



call the roll 



this 



Oh, have we got support? I'm sorry. I'm new at 



MR. GOMES: Senator and Members, my name is 
George Gomes. I'm with the California Farm Bureau. 

I'm here to support the appointment, the 
confirmation, of Ms. Shiroma. And I think you should reflect oi 
her standard of performance as it relates to a public servant. 
She is one who has, I think, achieved some admirable levels of 
performance and should be emulated by others in public service, 



to where she comes to the job without a personal agenda, other 
than to implement the law and to translate it as it was intended 
by the Members of this House. 

So, we certainly support the objective job that 
she is doing, and the standards that she set in influencing 
other members of the Board to also reach out to the agricultural 
farmers and their employees and others to try and have a valid 
and objective interpretation of the law. 

Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. I think you're 
supporting a winner. 

Any opposition? Hearing no opposition, 
Secretary, call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 



SECRETARY WEBB 
SENATOR KNIGHT 
SECRETARY WEBB 
SENATOR ROMERO 
SECRETARY WEBB 
SENATOR KNIGHT 



Kanette Aye. Senator Knight. 

Aye. 

Knight Aye. Senator Romero. 

Aye. 

Romero Aye. Three to zero. 

Three to zero. 



Congratulations . 

MS. SHIROMA: Thank you so much. Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Next will be Norma Turner, 
General Counsel, Agricultural Labor Relations Board. 

MS. TURNER: Chairman Knight, Members of the 
Committee, thank you for this opportunity to share with you a 
brief overview of the work of the General Counsel. 



10 



The Act vests in the office total and final 
authority to investigate all unfair labor practice charges, to 
issue complaints in meritorious cases, and to prosecute them 
•; both before the law judges and the Board. 

Then, when the Board remedies violations of the 
Act, it is General Counsel who enforces its orders. It is 
through the Board's remedial provisions that the purposes and 
policies of the Act are defined, rights are protected, and 
9 further unlawful conduct is deterred. 
10 My entire legal career has been that of a labor 

lawyer. I was here when the ALRB opened its doors. And 
12 although the Board has since that time issued hundreds of 

decisions and rulings, let me assure you that no two cases are 
alike. Every case raises new facts, and new analysis, and new 

15 interpretations of established precedents. 

16 And the Board, I think, has had an astonishing 

17 record of success in defending its decisions in the various 
Courts of Appeal, so there is a clear body of labor law under 
the California Act. And of course, there is 65 years of federa 
precedence under the National Labor Relations Act which we are 

21 bound to follow. 

22 I know that the agency will confront new and 
emerging issues in the years ahead, and while no one can predic 

24 what issues will land on the General Counsel's desk, I think it 
is important the General Counsel have the knowledge and the 

26 competence to deal with all issues, and to do so quickly and 
consistently based only on sound labor law principals. 

28 Litigation is time consuming and costly for all 






11 



parties. It may even be ugly, particularly for farmworkers who 
have had no experience with the legal system. If I have an 
agenda, it is to vigorously enforce meritorious cases while 
somehow finding the means by which to simplify and expedite that 
process . 

For example, we will assist parties in 
voluntarily resolving their disputes by early settlement in 
order to eliminate need for trial, and where feasible, we must 
abandon the present dual litigation process whereby liability 
and damages are resolved in separate and often protracted 
proceedings . 

Finally, an issue which obscures all others for 
me, and that is how to timely and thoroughly investigate 
charges. That task should and will consume me in an ongoing 
experiment. Any delay in investigating charges inevitably 
results in an unjust benefit for wrong doers and unjustified 
harm to those whose rights have been violated. 

I respectfully ask for your endorsement of my 
appointment, and I welcome your questions. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

As the Counsel, do you believe that the current 
staffing of the ALRB is adequate to address the diverse language 
and cultural needs of the farmworker community? If not, what is 
your view? 

MS. TURNER: Let me share, let me share an actual 
case we just had out of Santa Maria. Ninety farmworkers who did 
not speak Spanish but spoke various indigenous languages and 
related dialects -- 



12 



SENATOR KNIGHT: Indigenous to what? 

MS. TURNER: Mixteco, some other Indian dialects 
We were not familiar with the language. Our interpreters were 
not familiar with the language. 

We settled that case without a trial. But in 
order to do so, we first had to interview ninety employees with 
interpreters who went from Mixteco to Spanish, and then another 
set of interpreters who went from Spanish to English. 

After we settled the case, we had to go back and 
re-interview all ninety farmworkers in order to get their work 
history, in order to determine what interim employment they 
might have had because we mitigate damages. That's one case. 

How we did it, we tasked all of our regional 
offices -- we have four right now -- taking people away from 
other tasks, from elections, from investigation of charges. 

Yes, we need more staff. I'm not prepared to 
tell you where, and how many, or whether they'll be field 
examiners or attorneys. I still have to' learn that process. I 
need to get into the regional offices and be able to assess more 
accurately. 

But if I find a need, I'm not shy, and I'm right 
across the street. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I know you're not shy. 
[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Questions of the Committee, 
Senator Karnette? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I don't really know what the 
access rule is. Would you explain that, and tell me if you 






i 






I 



13 



support it? 

I mean, I should know, but I don't. 

MS. TURNER: You heard about the access rule. 
You will hear a lot about the access rule. It's been quite 
controversial . 

There have been those who have proposed that our 
Act be changed to eliminate the access rules because there is no 
access rule in the federal statute, after which we are modeled, 
the National Labor Relations Act. 

In 25 years, I have never found a single issue 
under our Act that did not have its genesis in federal labor 
law. The difference in our Act and the National Act with regard 
to access is just a matter of procedure. 

Under the National Act, a labor organization 
loses an election, files an election objection and says, we 
lost because we didn't have access. The National Board may 
conclude, you're right, it's because you didn't have access. 
Henceforth you will have access, back to the get-go, and 
organize all over again. By this time there has been a 
turnover . 

Or, you file an unfair labor practice charge 
making the same allegation, and eventually, if you prevail, you 
then have access. 

That is based on the federal presumption that 
with an established, stable, industrial labor force, there are 
always reasonable alternative means of communicating with 
employees. The rule was developed initially for the resorts in 
the Catskills, where the staffs lived on the premises. 



14 



What our Board did in 1975 was, take that same 
access rule and apply it in California, but to base it on a very 
different presumption. That presumption being that with a 
migratory and rural workforce in agriculture, there are no 
reasonable, adequate means of communicating with employees. 

So, under our Act, it is a given that union 
organizers will have access to the employees at the work site, 
but under strict time and manner provisions. For example, two 
organizers per crew, an hour before work, an hour after work, at 
noon time up to one hour, but conditioned by the actual time the 
employees are taking lunch. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Did you get that, Senator 



Karnette? 



organizing 



SENATOR KARNETTE: It sounds like teachers 



[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you' very much. 

Again, you've got some very strong credentials 
and strong letters of support on your behalf. 

I read through your response letter. On Page Two 
in particular, I noted that you did address the question of the 
increased use of farm labor contractors. 

I'd like to ask if you can expand upon your 
response again in terms of how, in your opinion, the rise of the 
use of farm labor contractors has changed, and perhaps made more 
difficult, the enforcement side. 

MS. TURNER: Well, we no longer have union hiring 



15 



1 halls, as you know. 

2 SENATOR KNIGHT: Street corners. 

3 MS. TURNER: We have the rise of sophisticated 

4 farm labor contractors, which are large employers in their own 

5 right. 

6 The Act excludes labor contractors from the 

7 definition of employer. The ALRB has made some allowances over 

8 the years. And that is, if there is a labor contractor that is 

9 more than just a mere provider of employees, we might consider 

10 that entity to be an employer. 

11 The test is, does the entity have the resources, 

12 the longevity, to remedy unfair labor practices, and in 

13 particular, enter into collective bargaining agreements. 

14 It's been many years since we've looked at those 

15 cases. It's been many years since we've had a real labor 

16 contractor issue. 

17 I anticipate that in the months ahead, we will be 

18 looking at those. And I will have to assess them, and judge 

19 them, and take them to the Board. 

20 The problem that I can tell you immediately that 

21 we are having with labor contractors is, as Ms. Shiroma said, 

22 the employer is the employer of the employees provided by the 

23 contractor. And any misconduct by a labor contractor is 

24 directly imputable to the employer. 

25 The present pressing problem with labor 

26 contractors is, the Board issues a decision, it remedies unfair 

27 labor practices, it may designate a remedy to an entire employee 

28 unit. That case will go through the Court of Appeals, come 



16 



back. At that point, we have to find those farmworkers. Time 
is against us. 

We just resolved a case that began with an 
election on July 27th, 1974, went to the Courts of Appeal. It 
went to the California Supreme Court. It came back. We opened 
compliance. We were lucky in that case. We came up with an 
assessment of what was due each employee, and employer said, I 
accept that. And there was no contest. We issued roughly 
$400,000 to 600 — theoretically to 640 employees. We are still 
looking for the last batch of 140. Those are employees that 
were provided by a labor contractor out of the Fresno area. 

Sometimes we luck out; sometimes we don't. We 
resorted to spots on radio, foreign language newspapers, 
employers, unions. It's an ongoing problem. 

I'm very interested in some of the new farm labor 
contractor legislation that just went through the Senate. And I 
note in particular, on the Burton bill, labor contractors are 
required to issue pay stubs. This may help us and help the 
farmworker in identifying the employer. 

What I need to know now is, is the there any way 
we can hold the farm labor contractor to maintain payroll 
records for a period of time? 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Any other questions from the 
Committee? 

Any support? 

MR. GABRIEL: I'm Roy Gabriel, representing the 
California Farm Bureau. 



17 



1 I just want to let you know, I've known Norma 

2 Turner for 25 years. There's no skeletons in her closet that 

3 I'm aware of. 

4 Interestingly enough, ALRB General Counsel 

5 appointees over the years, some have been quite controversial in 

6 one way or another. They've either been aligned to one side or 

7 another. 

8 Norma 's probably the first appointee that really, 

9 you know, has been fair and objective. She may be the most 

10 qualified person ever appointed to this position because of her 

11 25 years of experience dealing with California agricultural 

12 labor law. 

13 We are very pleased to support her appointment. 

14 Thank you. 

15 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

16 MS. TURNER: That's nice. Thank you, Roy. 

17 SENATOR KNIGHT: You have people that can support 

18 you. It's all right. 

19 Any opposition? 

2 SENATOR KARNETTE : Move it. 

21 SENATOR KNIGHT: It's been moved. Secretary, 

22 call the roll. 

23 SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 
2 4 SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

25 SECRETARY WEBB: Kanette Aye. Senator Knight. 

2 6 SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

27 SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Romero. 

2 8 SENATOR ROMERO: Aye. 



approved. 



introduce? 



18 

SECRETARY WEBB: Romero Aye. Three to zero. 
SENATOR KNIGHT: Three to zero, confirmation's 

Do you have any family here that you'd like to 



MS. TURNER: I do. My daughter-in-law is here. 
Ann, where are you? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Congratulations. 

MS. TURNER: Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Next we have Melinda G. Wilson, 
Chief Deputy Director, Department of Rehabilitation. 

MS. WILSON: Thank you, Chairman Knight, Members 
of the Committee. 

I'm honored to sit before you here today and to 
seek your confirmation of my appointment to Chief Deputy 
Director, Department of Rehabilitation. 

I was warned that I only have two minutes to 
speak. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I didn't say that. 

MS. WILSON: No, not you, Senator. 

So, I thought about the comments I would like to 
make. I was thinking about my opportunities in this country, 
and what really makes this country great. 

It's great because it does afford each and every 
one of us opportunities in education, employment, careers, being 
able to own property, homes, raising children, social 
opportunities, as well as being able to contribute back to 
society. 



19 



1 When I was a young girl 18 years old, I was 

2 pregnant, on welfare, but I also was in a college. And a couple 

3 of years later, I was able to obtain full-time employment. It 

4 took me seven years, working full-time and having two young 

5 children, before I got my Bachelor's degree, but I was able to 

6 do that. 

7 Then subsequently, I was able to have a 27-year 

8 career with the Department of Rehabilitation. Also, at age 41, 

9 I was able to attend law school part-time and become an 

10 attorney, sworn in by the California Bar. 

11 I raised the opportunities that I've had because 

12 my commitment, my agenda here today, is to increase 

13 opportunities for Calif ornians with disabilities. 

14 I sit before you, and I commit to you, as well as 

15 to members of the Department of Rehabilitation, and Californians 

16 with disabilities, that under the esteemed leadership of 

17 Catherine Campisi, our Director, I will assist in increasing our 

18 employment outcomes at the Department for individuals with 

19 disabilities, managing our resources, partnering with our 

20 consumers, with community agencies, with other interested 

21 rehabilitation programs, and also doing all of these, most 

22 importantly, in an environment of dignity, trust, and respect. 

23 I respectfully request your confirmation of my 

24 appointment this afternoon, and I'm prepared to answer any 

25 questions. 

2 6 Thank you very much. 

27 SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

28 Many believe that the Department has had 



20 



difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified staff. 

What progress have you made in that arena? 

MS. WILSON: We have made some progress. 
However, it's very slow. But we do anticipate significant 
progress, hopefully within the next year, and let me tell you 
why. 

We have had difficulty recruiting rehabilitation 
counseling staff in particular. But just most recently, the 
State Personnel Board did approve a declassification for our 
rehabilitation counseling series. So, instead of having three 
steps within the counseling series, we now will have five steps, 
which will allow us, based on the education, training, and 
experience of individuals who apply for rehabilitation 
counselors, allow us to bring those individuals in at one of 
those five steps. 

Before, we were pretty much precluded from 
bringing anyone in at the top step. If in fact individuals have 
a Master's degree, and have the qualification and experience, we 
can recruit and appoint at the higher step. This will help 
tremendously. 

The other thing is that we find certain areas of 
the state are harder to recruit than others, for example, the 
Bay Area, San Francisco Bay Area. And we have been approved for 
a geographical pay differential for our rehabilitation 
counseling staff, our counselors, our supervisors, and our 
clerical staff. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: So what is your percentage of 
staffing right now? 






21 



1 MS. WILSON: Excuse me? 

2 SENATOR KNIGHT: What is your percentage of 

3 staffing? What percentage of total staffing do you have now? 

4 MS. WILSON: We have close to 2,000 staff in 

5 total within the Department. 

6 SENATOR KNIGHT: Those are people on board? 

7 MS. WILSON: Those are not people on board. 

8 SENATOR KNIGHT: That's positions? 

9 MS. WILSON: That's positions, authorized 

10 positions. 

11 SENATOR KNIGHT: How many are unfilled? 

12 MS. WILSON: How many positions are unfilled? 

13 Gosh, I'm sorry. I don't know that off-hand. I think I'm a 

14 little bit nervous. 

15 SENATOR KNIGHT: No need to be nervous. Burton's 

16 not here. 

17 , [Laughter . ] 

18 MS. WILSON: We just recently had a vacancy 

19 meeting to really strategize around increasing the number of 

20 positions we have in terms of filling positions. And I know 

21 that -- I just -- I'm sorry. I can't recollect the number. We 

22 were concentrating on rehabilitation counselors in particular. 

23 SENATOR KNIGHT: There's some that would indicate 

24 that the Department does not have the ability to manage a 

25 budget, or maintain and analyze data that has been up to the 

26 standard. 

27 MS. WILSON: Well, the Bureau of State Audits 

28 conducted a review of our program. 



22 






Are you talking about our overall budget? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Yes. 

MS. WILSON: Yes, and made recommendations 
regarding better managing our resources. 

We have implemented several strategies to attend 
to that, and we plan to implement further. For example, one of 
the things that we are doing is improving our management 
information system, because that's critical in terms of the 
types of reports, the kinds of information we provide our top 
managers as well as our middle managers, so that, in fact, we 
can see how the resources are utilized, where we're using 
resources, where the problem areas are, where the variances are 

So, we are working on improving our management 
information systems. 

We also have asked our rehabilitation counselors 
to better scrutinize the planned development for our consumers, 
as well as the process. During the process, making sure that 
the consumer is making progress in his or her plan, and making 
sure that the services that we're providing lead to the 
outcome . 

We also are getting the consumers more involved 
in the process so that -- and stressing employment outcomes 
initially when they come through the front door. 

But in general, we definitely recognize the need 
to better manage our resources, and we are implementing 
strategies to do so. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Within the community of the 
blind there is some 70 percent unemployment. 



23 



1 Can you give me some reason for that? 

2 MS. WILSON: Just recently I presented to the 

3 Workforce Investment Board, and actually there was 70 percent 

4 unemployment, the information that I presented, for individuals 

5 with significant disabilities across the board. 

6 But in reference to individuals who are blind and 
visually impaired, we have been meeting with advocates, the 

8 Blind Alliance for Rehabilitation Change. Our Director, 

9 Catherine Campisi, when she came on board in 1999, began initial 

10 discussions with them, and those have continued. 

11 We are looking at, once again, policies, 

12 procedures, strategies, to address the issues of 70 percent 

13 unemployment among individuals who are blind and visually 

14 impaired. 

15 Some of it, in terms of just general society, you 

16 ask for reasons, you know, there's a lot of misconception in 

17 , terms of what individuals who are blind can and cannot do. 

18 There is employer discrimination. There is discrimination. 

19 But what we're trying to do is look internally 

20 within our own Department, what things can we put in place. And 

21 we have put in several things. First of all, we have 

22 reorganized in terms of our divisions, and we've put the 

23 services, our specialized services for blind and visually 

24 impaired, under one division. We've hired an individual who 

25 is -- has personal experience with blindness herself, who is 

26 very credible, and has a lot of knowledge, Linda Bardis. She's 

27 a Deputy Director over that division. 

28 We also have -- we're looking at training 



24 

programs for our rehabilitation counselors who specifically 
serve individuals are who are blind and visually impaired. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Let me back up just a minute. 

You indicated that there was discrimination. 
There was a reluctance on employers to hire the blind or 
impaired visually. 

But I would assume those are normal factors, and 
they're everyday factors. 

So, do you have a program that addresses those 
kinds of things? 

MS. WILSON: Surely. 

Working outreach, outreaching to employers to 
make sure that they are aware of the strengths, the benefits, of 
hiring individuals with disabilities, and particularly 
individuals who are blind and visually impaired. Making sure 
they're aware of the laws in terms of anti-discrimination laws, 
the Americans with Disabilities Act. Helping them to understand 
how they can reasonably accommodate individuals with 
disabilities, particularly those who are blind and visually 
impaired. Some of those things. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you, Senator 
Knight . 

Actually, Senator Knight and I, we've known each 
other a long time. A long time ago, he used to watch my 
briefcase because I was always forgetting it. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Don't get any ideas about 









25 



1 Karnette. She's a Democrat. 

2 [Laughter . ] 

3 SENATOR KARNETTE: Oh well, Pete, you know, this 

4 is a democracy. I have respect for you. 

5 The Department of Rehab, provides vendors who 

6 contract with state agencies for vending machine services. 

7 Ironwood State Prison in Blythe has had a serious problem with 

8 its vending machines with the Department of Rehab, when they're 

9 contracted to stock and keep it in running order. 

10 What happens is, people go there, and that's the 

11 only place, when they visit, that they can get food. And 

12 they're often broken. 

13 We were wondering if you can help us out here. 

14 Do you know why this happens? Can we resolve it, because if you 

15 lived in Blythe, you'd need a Coke. 

16 MS. WILSON: Right. 

17 , Well, I'm aware of the problem. I understand 

18 that there's approximately 18 vending machines at Ironwood State 

19 Prison. 

20 And what I'm told is that the machines are -- the 

21 age of the machines range from one to six years old. And that 

22 there's just very heavy use, because that is the only facility 

23 for food. 

24 What has been happening is because of the heat 

25 and the really heavy use. When they break down, the vendor, 

26 whom I understand is a very successful vendor in terms of 

27 operating these vending machines, but what the vendor tries to 

28 do is to get it repaired as guickly as possible. So, many times 



26 



that does mean repairing it during the heaviest traffic on the 
weekends. 

But that's not to say that that's going to 
address the issue of individuals needing to have food, and 
they're there, and the vending machines not operational. 

So, what I would like to tell you is that already 
we have our business enterprise consultant and our field 
representative working with the vendor to address the problem, 
and we are committed to addressing it. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: It's really, I think, a very 
important thing we need to handle, because in isolated areas, 
it's really difficult. 

MS. WILSON: Exactly. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Do you think you could get 
back to us on that? I would like to hear about that. 

MS. WILSON: I will absolutely do that. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: And I have one other question, 
if it's all right, Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Go ahead, Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: I am interested, and I 
mentioned this to you earlier, in what happens to the disabled 
as they age. Do you have special programs? All of us have 
various problems as we age, but the disabled have even more; 
it's even more serious. 

MS. WILSON: Yes. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Do you have any special 
counselors or programs for the aging process? 

MS. WILSON: Well, specifically for individuals 



27 






1 who are blind and visually impaired, we do have counselor- 

2 teachers who work with the individuals in their home many times 

3 to assist them to adjust if they have just recently been blinded 

4 or recently lost their sight. 

5 So, we do have counselor-teachers that teach 

6 mobility, orientation, how to prepare the food, once the sight 

7 is gone or diminished. 

8 In addition to that, we also, in our Department, 

9 administer the independent living programs, administer the 

10 funding for independent living programs. And those programs are 

11 committed to independent living, making sure that individuals 

12 are able to live in their communities, to access resources in 

13 their communities. So, I think that's another dynamic in terms 

14 of, as individuals with disabilities age, making sure that they 

15 are connected to those resources provided by the Independent 

16 Living Centers. 

17 And then, as I shared with you earlier, there is 

18 an initiative by the Governor that's being administered out of 

19 Health and Human Services Agency, actually planning for it, and 

20 that's long-term care. Basically it is an aging with dignity 

21 initiative, what kind of resources are needed as the population 

22 ages, whether it be nondisabled and disabled, and making sure 

23 those resources are available. 

2 4 SENATOR KARNETTE: Thank you. 

2 5 SENATOR KNIGHT: Senator Romero. 

2 6 SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

27 Is there a state department or agency that is 

28 responsible for monitoring state compliance with ADA? 



28 



MS. WILSON: The Department of Rehabilitation, 
our department, has a lead in terms of providing technical 
assistance, but we don't actually monitor. 

I think you would have to look, for example, at 
what the subject matter is. If it's employment discrimination 
under the ADA, if it was just precluded by the ADA, then you 
probably would look at Fair Employment and Housing. 

If it has to do with physical access, 
architectural barriers, you probably would look at the General 
Services, Department of General Services. 

Our Department, we do have a critical role in 
terms of providing consultation and assistance to other state 
agencies on how they can comply with the ADA. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Thank you. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Thank you. 

Now you see, Melinda, it wasn't so bad; was it? 

MS. WILSON: No, it wasn't, I guess. I'll let 
you know in about an hour, after I settle down. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: The last question was, I want to 
know what you you're going to do with me when I get a little 
older . 

[Laughter. ] 

MS. WILSON: What do you have in mind. 
[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I'll talk to you in an hour. 
[Laughter. ] 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Do you have any support, 
Melinda, or do you have anybody that you want to introduce, 



29 



family or anything? 

MS. WILSON: I will say I have plenty of family, 
but they're all in Los Angeles. 

Can I just have my Rehabilitation family stand, 
or wave their hands? 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Certainly. They all sat in the 
back. Is the there a reason for that? 

MS. WILSON: They're probably making fun of me. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: I don't think so. If they are, 
ask them where they're going to work next week. 

[Laughter. ] 

MS. WILSON: All right. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Anybody in opposition? Do I 
have a motion? 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Move the confirmation. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Secretary, call the roll. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Senator Karnette. 

SENATOR KARNETTE: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Kanette Aye. Senator Knight. 

SENATOR KNIGHT: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Knight Aye. Senator Romero. 

SENATOR ROMERO: Aye. 

SECRETARY WEBB: Romero Aye. Three to zero. 

MS. WILSON: I thank you very, very much. 

[Thereupon this portion of the 

Senate Rules Committee hearing 

was terminated at approximately. 

2:20 P.M. ] 



30 



CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER 






I, EVELYN J. MIZAK, a Shorthand Reporter of the State 
of California, do hereby certify: 

That I am a disinterested person herein; that the 
foregoing transcript of the Senate Rules Committee hearing was 
reported verbatim in shorthand by me, Evelyn J. Mizak, and 
thereafter transcribed into typewriting. 

I further certify that I am not of counsel or 
attorney for any of the parties to said hearing, nor in any way 
interested in the outcome of said hearing. 

j IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 

_/ day of Jjji^L _» 2001 




/*'> 



■~c c 



\fiiisS- 



EVELYN J. MIZAK - 
Shorthand Reporter 



31 



?0M : URJ POLITICAL FAX NO. : 916-341-0401 Plpr. 30 2001 11 :00AM P2 



.^iSfe United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO 






April 30, 2001 

Honorable Senator John Burton, Chair 
Seriate Rules Committee 
Capitol Building, Room #400 
Sacmmenlo, Ca 95814 

Re: Agricultural Labor Relations Board Confirmation 

Dear Senator Burton, 

On behalf of the United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO I wish to express our 
support for the confirmation of Genevieve Shiroma as Chair and Member of the 
Agricultural I-abor Relations Board. 

Wc have been satisfied with her professionalism and energy in fairly administering the 
Agricultural Labor Relations Act and confident in her ability to equally serve the needs of 
Farm Workers and the Agricultural Industry in California. 

Sincerely, 



Rosalinda Guillen 

National Vice President, UFW 








cc : Senator Ross Johnson( Vice Chair) 
Senator Gloria Romero 
Senator Betty Karnette 
Senator Wm. J. "Pete" Knight 
Executive Officer, Greg Schmidt 



TO! ! IFU POLITICAL FOX NO. ! 916-341-0401 «pr. 30 2001 12:08PM P3 



^ ,„ United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO 

April 30, 2001 

Greg Schmidt 
Senate Rules Committee 
Capitol Building, Room #400 
Sacramento, Ca 95814 

Re: Agricultural Labor Relations Agency (^nfinnation 

Dear Mr. Schmidt, 

n„ tehalf of the United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO I wish to express our 
S53£ mSrmation of Norma Turner as Geueral Counsel for the Agricultural 
Labor Relations Agency. 

Norma has vast experience and history with the AgnculturalL^r Relation Agency aud 
^confident she will fairly enforce the Agricultural Labor Relatrons Act 

Sincerely, 

Rosalinda Guillen 

National Vice President, UFW 

cc: Senator J ohn Burton(Chair) 

Senator Ross Johnson( Vice Chair) 
Senator Gloria Romero 
Senator Wm. J. Knight 
Senator Betty Karnette 



425-R 
Additional copies of this publication may be purchased for $3.00 per copy 
(includes shipping and handling) plus current California sales tax. 

Senate Publications 

1020 N Street, Room B-53 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916)327-2155 

Make checks payable to SENATE RULES COMMITTEE. 
Please include Stock Number 425-R when ordering.